This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 DHAKA 001096
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.
"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.