UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 DHAKA 001096

SIPDIS

FOR I/FW, B/G, IIP/G/NEA-SA, B/VOA/N (BANGLA SERVICE) STATE
FOR SA/PAB, SA/PPD (LSCENSNY, SSTRYKER), SA/RA, INR/R/MR,
AND PASS TO USAID FOR ANE/ASIA/SA/B (WJOHNSON)

CINCPAC FOR PUBLIC DIPLOMACY ADVISOR, J51 (MAJ TURNER), J45
(MAJ NICHOLLS)

USARPAC FOR APOP-IM (MAJ HEDRICK)

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: KMDR OIIP OPRC KPAO PREL ETRD PTER ASEC BG OCII
SUBJECT: Media Reaction: U.S. Human Rights Report on
Bangladesh, Drug Trafficking; Dhaka
Summary: A columnist of the "New Age" says by forcing Syria
to withdraw troops from Lebanon, America and Israel have at
the most won a Pyrrhic victory. Israeli territory and

interests will continue to be under attack as long as it
remains an illegal occupier of land. It will also bear the
burden of opprobrium as being a pariah state.
--------------
Middle East
--------------
"Who Is The Pariah?"
English daily "New Age" op-ed opine (03/13/05):
By forcing Syria to withdraw troops from Lebanon, America
and Israel have at the most won a Pyrrhic victory. Israeli
territory and interests will continue to be under attack as
long as it remains an illegal occupier of land. It will also
bear the burden of opprobrium as being a pariah state,

It is old hat and does not involve a brilliant intellectual
pyrotechnics to say that America's strategic and geo-
political interests in the Middle East are dictated by two
main considerations. One is to secure the uninterrupted
production and supply of oil from the oil producing
countries there and the other is to ensure the security of
Israel, its most trusted ally in the region and soul-brother
by virtue of the Zionists lobby active in the country's
politics. The foreign policy of America in the Middle East
has long used these two motives as the catalyst and
lynchpin.
America's success in protecting its oil interest in the
Middle East has been nothing short of spectacular. It has
exerted influence over the oil producing Arab countries
since oil started gushing out from the desert land of
Bedouins. Libya and Iraq dared to challenge the hegemony for
sometime but that is now history. One has capitulated

unconditionally to America's military threat and the other
has been ruthlessly occupied after a brutal war of
aggression in spite of having no support from other
countries and the UN. The occupation of Iraq war has served
as a double entendre, serving both its oil interests and the
security concerns of Israel. The war of aggression can be
said to have been jointly planned and carried out by America
and Israel in so far as there was sharing of intelligence
and using the strategy of the `big fist'.

Even while the Iraq was in full throttle, many predicted
that Iraq and Syria were in America's sight and the two
countries were part of America's greater strategy of regime
change. In the event, America could not take on Iraq or
Syria because of the ground swell of world public opinion
against the imperialistic war and the unforeseen emergence
of a ferocious and sustained insurgency inside Iraq soon
after the fall of Baghdad. The failure to find weapons of
mass destruction in Iraq was not only a great embarrassment
and a public relations debacle but also a moral defeat for
Bush administration, which forced America to rein in.

America, however, did not give up its hostility and
belligerence towards Iran and Syria. It carried on a
relentless propaganda offensive against the two countries
for allegedly giving sanctuary to the fugitive leaders of
the Saddam regime and for fomenting trouble inside Iraq by
sending foreign insurgents. No convincing evidence could be
produced in support of this diatribe and so America and its
minion Israel bided for time to justify the demonization of
Iran and Syria. The nuclear power plant being built by Iran
at Busheyr with Russian and other European countries'
support proved handy to be used as the cudgel. Suddenly,
America started a vigorous campaign for the discontinuance
of Iraq's nuclear energy programmed alleging that it was
clandestinely carrying out a nuclear weapons program or was
about to do so in order to make nuclear bombs. Possible
recovery of plutonium from heavy water reactor that Iron was
installing was also pointed out to buttress the suspicion.
Iranian authorities repeatedly assured that their country
had no nuclear weapons program and allowed the international
nuclear watchdog IAEA, to carry out necessary inspection on
regular basis. But it strongly refused to abandon the
nuclear energy program, considering it their national right.
long as it remains an illegal occupier of land. It will also
bear the burden of opprobrium as being a pariah state,

Vice President Cheney mentioned in a speech that if Iran did
not stop its nuclear program Israel might attack the
installation. President Bush, on his part, has refused to
declare that no attack against Iran is in the cards, further
bolstering the suspicion that if Iran sticks to its decision
to continue with the nuclear energy program there will be
military attack against the country either directly by
America or by Israel. This will be both for regime change
and to destroy the nuclear facilities that have been built
so far. According to recent news reports American commandos
are already operating inside Iran, preparing for the attack
or gathering intelligence.

Thomas