MEDIA REACTION ON THE HUMAN RIGHTS REPORTS

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 AMMAN 001838 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 TSOU SIPDIC E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: KMDR JO SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION ON THE HUMAN RIGHTS REPORTS Summary -- Lead stories in all papers today, March 13, focus on continued violence in Iraq and developments in the Palestinian Territories. Two commentaries today criticize the U.S. Department of State Human Rights Reports. Editorial Commentary -- "The American report and human rights - democratic or political standards?" Columnist Mouafaq Mahadine writes on the op-ed page of independent, mass-appeal Arabic daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm (03/13): "Had the United States settled for viewing the status of human rights in each country without the least of intervention, comment or givens, the report would have actually been negotiable. The difference between the annual American reports that do not even have the trust of the victims themselves and the International Amnesty report, regardless of the observations on which we have, is that Amnesty International enjoys reasonable credibility in comparison with the American reports, because they employ less political considerations.. We cannot defend any oppressive authority. This is morally and democratically not permissible. It is also not permissible to be silent about the continued arrest of professors and thinkers who have not been involved in any conspiracies. Having said that, the American report from beginning to end is written in a clear tone of blackmail that is rejected. The report's notes on Syria are based on Syria's national stand vis- -vis the resistance in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine, and its notes on Iran are based on Iran's support for Hezbollah and Hamas. In turn, the report's praise of what it calls Iraqi democracy ignores the blood bath that is supervised by the American forces and the Iraqi Interior Ministry, just as the American praise for the Lebanese elections is based on Syria's withdrawal from Lebanon.. We do not support the confiscation or adaptation of political liberties to suit the moods of governments. However, we do not find the American mobilization against these countries an act of democracy related to human rather, rather political blackmail to punish these countries for their political stance." -- "Who is against human rights." Columnist Rakan Majali writes on the back-page of center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour (03/13): "Arab governments and people do not deny the fact that applying democracy is a far-fetched hope. At best, claims arise to the effect that this or that country is on the path to democracy. Democracy has become a slogan raised by governments in the face of its peoples, as well as a foreign slogan employed by America to service its policies. For example, the U.S. State Department annual human rights report focused on our region using politics that serve America's tendencies without any consideration for human rights. The funny thing is that the report considered the democratic development and human rights improvement in Iraq as a positive model for the required change in the region. The report stressed major successes achieved in the area of democracy and human rights in Lebanon, and this assessment would be correct if the meaning was that developments in Iraq and Lebanon serve the American policy. And so goes on the report. Countries close to the United States of America that suffer from chaos, destruction, instability and weakness are semi-democratic countries, while the countries that the United States sees as a stumbling block in the path of its hegemony over the region and that Israel is sensitive to are considered anti-democratic and anti-human rights countries. And while the positive model in the U.S. point of view is represented by Iraq and Lebanon, the negative model lies in Iran and Syria. In any case, the classification has nothing to do with democracy and human rights, which we do not deny are non- existent or, at best, weak. On the occasion of this report, we would like to refer to the fact that America was, until President Bush's presidency, the leader among world countries that enjoy democracy and human rights, and that now has come to rule with a mentality of the Inquisition Courts, martial law and preventive wars. America can say about us what it likes, but we did not have an exceptional democracy that we lost or human rights that we denied. But, America, itself, lost itself and inflicted upon the world an unprecedented aggressiveness and brought harm to human rights everywhere, including in America itself." HALE