Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
05AMMAN810
2005-02-02 11:04:00
UNCLASSIFIED
Embassy Amman
Cable title:  

MEDIA REACTION ON IRAQ ELECTION AND MIDDLE

Tags:  KMDR JO 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 AMMAN 000810

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

E.O. 12958: N/A

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


Summary

-- Lead stories today, February 2, highlight the
Israeli Palestinian conflict and domestic political
issues. Although reporting on the aftermath of the
Iraq election seems to have moved to the inside pages
of all papers, editorial commentary on the election
continues and has broadened to encompass the state of
democracy in the Arab world.

Editorial Commentary

-- "The road to Iraq's future"

Columnist Mohammad Abu Rumman writes on the op-ed page
of independent Arabic daily Al-Ghad (02/02): "In
light of the Iraq election and the nature of the
present formula, we would better to leave behind our
previous line of thinking and read the scene with more
objective analysis. The reading I refer to starts
with the following questions: why did the various
Iraqi sects, with the exception of the Sunnis, take
part in the elections and accept democracy under
American occupation? Will the current path of the
resistance lead to the liberation of Iraq and (serve)
its national interests? I see no difference among the
Iraqis of the various sects in terms of defining the
resistance as a national and religious duty and the
occupation as a despicable action. Yet there are
calculations behind the political conduct of the Kurds
and Shiites that push them towards appeasing and
supporting the occupation and widening the gap between
them and the Sunnis. The Shiites have suffered from
repression and oppression, their religious and
political freedoms were banned, and the `Saddam era'
committed major massacres and killings against them..
We, the Arabs of neighboring countries, created a
feeling of political, religious and social alienation
among the Iraqi Shiites. This is because Arabs
supported Saddam on the pretext of halting the Iranian
revolution while failing to say one word against the
massacres and crimes that were being committed against
these sects.. When the Iraqi resistance began it was
not accompanied by a political agenda that would
distance Sunnis as a whole from the events of the
previous era. On the contrary, the resistance was
defined as a resistance linking Sunnis with the Baath
party and remnants of the former regime.. Meanwhile,
the American occupation appealed to the Shiites,
stressing to them that the outcome of the Iraqi

political process would reformat the political arena
in a manner that guarantees the rule of the majority,
namely the Shiites.. The western and American media
at the beginning of the occupation tended to hold the
Sunnis responsible for the heritage of the `Saddam
era', although the Sunnis were as much victims as the
other sects. Iraq, in reality, was not ruled by the
Sunnis, but by a class of corrupt officials,
dictators, and a repressive police system. Like it or
not, the Iraqi elections actually succeeded, and
sooner or later the American occupation is on its way
out. As for the armed Iraqi resistance, if it is not
accompanied by a sound political agenda that goes
beyond Zarqawi and his group and that understands the
previous era and the aspirations of the other sects,
it will not lead to liberation but rather to civil
war. As much as we are proud of the national
resistance, the priority of the Sunnis today must
shift to the political arena."

-- "Iraq: what next?"

Former Cabinet Minister Mohammad Halaiqah writes on
the back-page of independent Arabic daily Al-Ghad
(02/02): "We are trying to be optimistic about what
is going on in Iraq in terms of a semi-democracy that
is taking place, just as we were previously optimistic
about the Palestinian elections, which were close to
being an advanced form of democracy. The Palestinian
and Iraqi people are both under occupation but the
difference between them is striking. One is trying to
get rid of the occupation and to establish an
independent state, and the other is seeking the help
of the occupation to rebuild its institutions and
regain control of the country's capabilities. We are
trying to be optimistic despite the small room that
exists for such optimism, and that is because we
believe in the Iraqi people."

-- "The problem is with us"
Daily columnist Jamil Nimri writes on the back-page of
independent, mass-appeal Arabic daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm
(02/02): "The sad outcome that we see in the reality
on the ground is that the most democratic elections
these days have taken place under two occupations: the
American occupation in Iraq and the Israeli occupation
in Palestine; that is in the absence of a local
authority that controls the decision!"

-- "One fact and deceiving details"

Daily columnist Rakan Majali writes on the back-page
of center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour
(02/02): "When talking about the Iraq election under
occupation, we forget the basic fact, namely that the
military occupation of any country is the highest form
of aggression and an expression of revenge, murder and
destruction.. The Iraqi people know that they have
been subject to a vicious colonial conspiracy and the
elections are not going to derail their attention from
the resistance of injustice and conspiracy.. Any
claims that the United States is keen to exercise
democracy are false claims, because America uses
slogans of freedom to strike against freedom, nullify
sovereignty and cancel independence."

-- "If I had the chance, I would visit Auschwitz"

Daily columnist Bater Wardam writes on the op-ed page
of center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour
(02/02): "I am personally and categorically convinced
about rejecting normalization with Israel. I have
never visited the Zionist state. I have never been in
direct contact with Israelis in a political or media
dialogue and I have never taken part in any research
project with members of an Israeli organization. I
have never been in a place with any Israelis except in
some European airports and international conventions.
I will maintain this stand until Israel restores the
rights of the Palestinian people, until a peace
agreement is reached, until the independent
Palestinian state is established, and until Israeli
crimes against the Palestinian people are stopped.
Having said that, I stick to making a differentiation
between Jews and Israelis, and I find no problem with
dealing with non-Zionist and non-Israeli Jews..
European Jews who fell victim to the Nazis in the
forties suffered a tremendous human slaughter,
something never seen in history except in the
crusaders slaughter of Muslims in the middle ages, the
Turks slaughter of the Armenians, the Israeli
slaughter of the Palestinians, the Serbs slaughter of
the Bosnians, the Russians slaughter of the Chechens,
and the American slaughters against Japan, Vietnam and
Iraq. These are ugly records in the human history of
mass annihilation and racial extermination. One
cannot deal with them selectively. We cannot reject
the slaughters committed against Muslims but ignore
the ones committed against peaceful Jews and
Armenians.. It is clear that the Zionists learned
nothing from the Holocaust. They continue to exercise
the same Nazi measures against the Palestinians and
pile up nuclear weapons in the region in preparation
for a holocaust that wipes away everything.
Meanwhile, the Europeans celebrate getting rid of the
mark of the holocaust, since they resolved their
problem by creating a huge problem in the heart of the
Arab world and moving the holocaust into our homes and
our lands. I would go to Auschwitz if I had the
chance. After all, the victims of the holocaust are
victims of the Zionist movement at the end of the day.
It would be better for Muslims to be part of rejecting
racism in all its forms and to distinguish between the
victims of the holocaust on one hand and the Zionists
and Israelis on the other hand, because merging the
last two would be serving exactly what Israel and the
Zionist movement want. That is why visiting Auschwitz
by Muslims and Arabs would a type of fighting
normalization with Israel and the Zionists."
HALE