Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
06ABUDHABI1119
2006-03-22 12:34:00
UNCLASSIFIED
Embassy Abu Dhabi
Cable title:  

MEDIA REACTION: TEHRAN AND WASHINGTON

Tags:  OIIP KMDR KPAO AE TC 
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 02 ABU DHABI 001119 

SIPDIS

STATE FOR NEA/ARP; NEA/PPD; NEA/RA; INR/R/MR; PA; INR/NESA;
INR/B; RRU-NEA IIP/G/NEA-SA
WHITE HOUSE FOR PRESS OFFICE; NSC
SECDEF FOR OASD/PA
USCINCCENT FOR POLAD
LONDON FOR MCKUNE

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: OIIP KMDR KPAO AE TC
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: TEHRAN AND WASHINGTON


UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 ABU DHABI 001119

SIPDIS

STATE FOR NEA/ARP; NEA/PPD; NEA/RA; INR/R/MR; PA; INR/NESA;
INR/B; RRU-NEA IIP/G/NEA-SA
WHITE HOUSE FOR PRESS OFFICE; NSC
SECDEF FOR OASD/PA
USCINCCENT FOR POLAD
LONDON FOR MCKUNE

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: OIIP KMDR KPAO AE TC
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: TEHRAN AND WASHINGTON



1. SUMMARY: A SAUDI COLUMNIST IN "AL-ITTIHAD" WONDERS WHY
WASHINGTON HAD TO RESORT TO ITS ENEMY IRAN AND NOT TO ITS
ARAB ALLIES TO RESOLVE IRAQ'S ISSUES. AN EDITORIAL IN "AL-
ITTIHAD" CLAIMS PRESIDENT BUSH'S RECENT SPEECH SHOWS THAT
ZIONIST INFLUENCE CONTROLS THE WHITE HOUSE. A UAE COLUMNIST
IN "AL-ITTIHAD" OPINES THAT EVERYONE IN HAS LOST IN IRAQ.
END SUMMARY.


2. Under the headline "Why did Washington resort to its
first enemy Iran", Dr. Khalid Al-Dakheel, a Saudi columnist
wrote in Abu Dhabi-based Arabic daily "Al-Ittihad,"
(circulation 65,000) 6/22:

"Bush in his speech affirmed that his country would use
force against Iran to defend Israel. With the Bush
administration's negative position against Iran possessing
nuclear weapons, a question comes: Why does Washington need
to negotiate with Tehran to find a way out of Iraq? Another
question: Why is Washington resorting to Iran, its first
enemy in the region, instead of resorting to its Arab
allies? This step taken by Washington has multiple
connotations: It confirms that Iranian influence has reached
a point where it cannot be overlooked inside Iraq, while at
the same time, Washington admits that Iran has interests in
Iraq and that it is time now to have these interests
enmeshed with Iraq's current issues. Does Washington want
to open a door for negotiations with Tehran where it would
recognize the legitimacy of Iran's interests in Iraq against
Iraq giving up its nuclear weapons? What does this also
tell us about U.S. foreign policies towards the Arab
countries? ...Can these negotiations lead to an exit from
the current situation in Iraq and having Washington leave
Iraq? It more likely seems that this step yields reverse
results... It is also strange that the Arab weakness is the
biggest factor that has allowed such a dichotomy which maybe
the reason behind removing the Iraqi issues from the hands
of Arab foreign policies to end up as a captive of two
strategies: either the American strategy backed up by the
Israelis, or the Iranian strategy. "


3. Under the headline "A message to those who do not yet
understand", Abu Dhabi-based Arabic daily "Al-Ittihad,"
(circulation 65,000) 6/22 wrote:

"What the two American researchers have said complies with
many studies taken, especially the American ones, affirming
the fact that the Zionist entity is the force that
influences the direction of the new conservative's
administration at the white house. Bush's speech came as a
literal translation to this fact when he said that he would
use force to defend its ally Israel. This happens at a time
when the region needs somebody to evict the Israeli terror
from it and not encourage this terror while nurturing and
protecting it. "


3. Under the headline "The third year for U.S. occupation:
Everyone is loosing in Iraq", UAE columnist Mohamed Al-
Hammadi wrote on Abu Dhabi-based Arabic daily "Al-Ittihad,"
(circulation 65,000) 6/22:

"Iraq has become a hostage not of the U.S. but of regional
countries. It has reached a point where the U.S. and Iran
want to bargain over it, and it seems that the price they
are bargaining is too precious against the democracy that we
have witnessed. By the U.S. accepting to sit down with Iran
and confer with it on Iraq, shows that Iran is reaping the
fruits of patience and this is not a reassuring indicator.
Iraqis are watching the U.S. and Iran bargaining with each
other on their own issues. Iran's interference is not new;
what is new is that it is seeking for an international cover
to legitimize its interference, while Iraq's sovereignty is
ignored. During Saddam's era, all Iraqis agreed that they
had Saddam Hussein as their one and only enemy, but today
Iraqis enemies are quadrupling and yesterday's friends are
today's enemies. Some Iraqis see Americans as their
enemies, while others see Al-Zarqawi and the terrorists with
him as their enemies. The Shiites see Sunnis as their
enemies, while some Sunnis consider the Shiites as their
rivals. The resistance regards members of the current Iraqi
government as their opponents. On the other hand, the Iraqi
politicians take their neighboring countries as their
enemies... The list of enemies is getting so long. After 3
years of occupation, the United States along with its allies
including Iran should realize that any security breach or
civil war means a breach in the entire region."


SISON