MEDIA REACTION: CRISIS IN LEBANON

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 ABU DHABI 002997 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 TC SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: CRISIS IN LEBANON ¶1. Summary: One editorial in "Al-Bayan" accused the United States of betraying Lebanon after it promised to support its new democracy. In "Al-Khaleej," one writer questioned how anyone could believe that Arabs would accept Israeli aggression given their own experiences with Israeli attacks, while another noted how President Bush's recent slip-up revealed his true goal: the liquidation of Lebanon. A writer in "Akhbar Al-Arab" commented on the broader consequences of the current conflict, specifically noting how it has revealed the commonalities of American and Israeli policy. Meanwhile, in "Emaratalyoum," a columnist highlighted the irony in America's efforts to wage war on terror while sewing the seeds of hate. Similarly a Kuwaiti columnist in "Al-Ittihad" speculated on the potential consequences of the current conflict, predicting that it would result in increased influence for Iran and more widespread anti-Americanism. Finally, an article in "Akhbar Al-Arab" criticized Condoleezza Rice for her one-sided perspective of the conflict, without giving adequate consideration to the sentiments of Arabs and Muslims. End Summary. ¶2. Under the headline "They betrayed Lebanon and defend its killers", the Dubai-based Arabic-language daily "Al-Bayan," (circulation 90,000) published the following in a 07/22 editorial: "... The current situation has revealed not only American reluctance to deter Israeli aggression, but a full-fledged conspiracy. When George Bush and Condoleezza Rice, or "Condi," state that it is not the right time to end aggression, or to hold talks over international peacekeepers, or to provide other forms of aid, this means that the attack was no surprise to the Americans or Tony Blair, and met with no resistance from them... According to The Independent newspaper, the United States and United Kingdom have colluded to defy the United Nations' demand for a ceasefire, and have condoned the daily bloodshed of civilians. This gives the slaughterer Olmert and his army a strong signal that they may continue their aggression without fearing any repercussions..." ¶3. Under the headline "Legalizing invasion", the Sharjah-based Arabic-language daily "Al-Khaleej" (circulation 90,000) published the following in a 07/20 editorial: "Those that call for us to give our blessings to Israeli's barbaric aggression against Lebanon presume that we are either stupid or politically oblivious. They do not realize that there is no more tolerance on our side for Israel-inflicted wounds... Who could believe such words, after we have been stung a hundred times by Israel, who continues to take lives in Lebanon and Gaza with the assistance of international supporters and Arab impotence?" ¶4. Under the headline "Far from wisdom and diplomacy", columnist Jaafar Mohamed Ahmed wrote the following in a 07/21 editorial in the Sharjah-based Arabic-language daily "Al-Khaleej" (circulation 85,000): "... A microphone accidentally left plugged-in has finally revealed the truth of George Bush's mind to the world: that he desires a new frontier in the already war-torn region. It also revealed that the American President has coordinated with European governments to give Israel a green light to proceed with its war, under the ubiquitous 'right to self-defense'. Furthermore, the United States made the United Nations condone Israel's actions, and prevented it from condemning the atrocities Israel has committed against innocent civilians in a war that at its best is a war of liquidation." ¶5. Under the headline "International cover-up of aggression", the Abu Dhabi-based Arabic-language daily "Akhbar Al-Arab" (circulation 20,000) wrote the following in a 07/22 unsigned editorial: "Throughout history, no culture has accepted humiliation, even for a short period of time. Today's struggles will strengthen Arab pride, as demonstrated in their willingness to make dramatic sacrifices. Hence the "revolution of truth" will not die out of external assault. This irritates Israel and the United States, who thought that the rights of Arabs in Lebanon, Palestine and Syria would eventually be forgotten. Recent events demonstrate that the Lebanese will not forget even a small 40 km piece of land, and three prisoners in Zionist jails. And how could the Syrians forget the Golan Heights, and the Palestinians their occupied land? If the United Nations wants to reach a final solution to this problem it should consider the rights of Arabs, and should remember that the Palestinians will never be annihilated like other peoples in history. Hence Kofi Annan should not expect the Arabs to surrender, even if U.N. proposals are accepted by the United States. The issue is bigger than just two kidnapped Israelis, as it demonstrates just how similar American and Israeli policies truly are, and the continued threat posed to the Arabs as a result." ¶6. Under the headline "Rice's labor pains", Emirati columnist Adel Mohammed Al-Rashed wrote the following in a 07/23 editorial in the Dubai-based Arabic-language tabloid "Emaratalyoum" (circulation 35,000): "... If Condoleezza Rice considers Israel's war on Lebanon and Palestine to be the labor pains of a new Middle East, then why is it that the Palestinians and Lebanese must suffer such pain? The American administration's greatest problem is that they fight terror and violence on one hand, but sew the seeds of hatred, terrorism and intolerance with the other. While it encourages one to hit his offender and take retribution, it demands of the other more forgiveness and acceptance. The Lebanese people had put their painful past behind them and begun rebuilding their country with an optimistic spirit open to Washington... But now they have found themselves part of a big game to redraw maps in the region to place it more firmly in American and Israeli hands. They have been chosen to endure the pain Rice was talking about." ¶7. On 07/23, Kuwaiti columnist Dr. Shamlan Yousef Al-Eissa wrote the following in an unsigned editorial in the Abu Dhabi-based semi-official Arabic-language daily "Al-Ittihad" (circulation 65,000): "Whatever its outcome, the Lebanese conflict will have a definitive impact on regional security. Most likely Iran will emerge with greater influence. Prior to this war, the Gulf criticized Iran for its efforts to frustrate U.S. efforts in Iraq. But now, with support for Hezbollah on the rise around the region, sympathy for Iran has also grown, as demonstrated by demonstrations in Bahrain and Kuwait... Anti-Americanism will be another product of this conflict. The hatred for U.S. policies that once pervaded primarily in the Levant is now spreading to the Gulf, and is evident in Kuwait where demonstrators have chosen to burn the American flag. The Kuwaitis, who once had such a close relationship with the United States, are now openly criticizing its policies in Lebanon and Palestine. Is this the beginning of a new wave of anti-Americanism in the Gulf? In the end, these new public sentiments and public outrage over the impotence of Arab regimes may finally urge individuals to join political organizations and work for liberation and the restoration of Arab dignity!" ¶8. Under the headline "What new Middle East?", the Abu Dhabi-based Arabic-language daily "Akhbar Al-Arab" (circulation 20,000) published the following in an 07/23 unsigned editorial: "Secretary Rice sacrifices her ability to conduct public diplomacy when she talks of the birth of a new Middle East from the humanitarian disasters in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the senseless violence in Palestine and Lebanon. The U.S. Secretary has only one perspective of the conflict: that of military victory for Washington and its ally in Israel, with no consideration for the feelings of the Arabs and Muslims who are increasingly angry over U.S. policies and the United States' support for Israel. Ultimately Rice sees these developments as an opportunity for the Arab and Muslim people to surrender to the U.S.-Israeli plan to make Israel the dominant power in the region." SISON