MEDIA REACTION ON THE ARAB SUMMIT IN KHARTOUM

UNCLAS AMMAN 002164 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 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: KMDR JO SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION ON THE ARAB SUMMIT IN KHARTOUM Editorial Commentary -- "Quiet summit over flaming issues" Chief Editor Taher Odwan writes on the back-page of independent, mass-appeal Arabic daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm (03/26): "I feel no enthusiasm about following up on the works of the Arab summit that started yesterday in Khartoum. Whoever described it as 'the quiet summit' said it best, and yet the source of this quietness is not the feeling of power or self-confidence, but rather the feeling of weakness, helplessness and surrender.. The quietness of the Khartoum summit is unfortunately an indication that the decision-making center has moved from the hands of the Arab countries to the hands of foreign countries. This region is living its worst historical crisis since era of national independence. The national state as such is threatened, for the first time, by ethnic and sectarian divisions, and foreign occupations have settled here and the international belief that the Arab affairs are the business of others is now prevalent.. It is a summit swamped with flaming issues, and yet, describing it as 'quiet' is a true reflection of the status of countries and regimes that are incapable of acting or reacting and that settle for quietness as if they are living up in the sky while their people sink in the mud of the earth." -- "Khartoum summit: there must be acknowledgement of helplessness first" Columnist Khairallah Khairallah writes on the op-ed page of independent, centrist Arabic daily Al-Ghad (03/26): "It is a scandal in all the meaning of the word exposed during the past three years that is since the American occupation of Iraq. It is a scandal that continues, summarizing the extent of the status of Arab helplessness which inevitably must be acknowledged at the end of the day if the Khartoum summit is to be at all successful. Acknowledging helplessness and the bitter reality of the nation is the first step towards getting out of the dilemma by asking this main question: what can be done and what cannot be done, and ultimately what can the Arabs do at any level, be that in Iraq, Palestine or Lebanon.. Does anyone want to learn the lesson of what happened in Iraq? The answer so far is no, with the exception of a few Arab leaders who warned and continue to warn of the repercussions of what is happening in Iraq and around it. The truth is, if we exclude these few leaders, no one wants to admit that the Arab summit ought to be discussing what to do to stop the civil war in Iraq instead of talking about the potential of its happening. Even more, is there still a possibility to talk about a joint Arab action for Iraq or is that too late? The future of Iraq now is being discussed between the United States and Iran, the latter being the first and foremost beneficiary of the American war on Iraq. Does the Arab summit have the guts to discuss this issue? Is this not the ultimate sign of Arab helplessness? Is the Arab summit not supposed to adopt a clear stand vis--vis the injustice that Lebanon suffered and continues to suffer from? There is another issue that needs to confronted, namely the political program of the new Palestinian government formed by Hamas. It is a program that opposes the Arab peace initiative endorsed at the Beirut summit in 2002. Can the Arab summit warn of the risks to which the Palestinian cause will be exposed at this stage since there is a clear contradiction between the PLO's political program that agrees with Beirut summit conclusions and the program adopted by the Hamas government? There must be a clear Arab stand in this regard, because without it, Israel would seem to be capable of attaining more gains at the expense of the Palestinian people and their legitimate rights.. Does anyone want to deal with the situation as it really stands, thus acknowledge helplessness first, or is the Arab summit supposed to be another Arab summit that deals with everything except the real problems that face the nation?" -- "Khartoum summit needs new no's Columnist Yaser Abu Hilaleh writes on the op-ed page of independent, centrist Arabic daily Al-Ghad (03/26): "When the Arabs launched their famous no's at the Khartoum summit after the defeat of 1967, they were trying to send a clear message to the people and to the world that military defeat does not become political defeat and that 'no reconciliation, no recognition and no negotiations' are not empty slogans but a realistic political move.. Had the Arabs then changed their no's to yes's, the situation would not have been much different now, and the proof to that is Oslo and what followed.. The Arabs abandoned their no's too early, and everyone entered into negotiations with the Israelis whose problem turned out to be with the Palestinians and no one else. After all, Egypt got Sinai back, Jordan got Al-Baqourah back, Lebanon got the south back, and Syria could get back the Golan now if it wants. The problem lies in the core issues of the Arab Israeli conflict: the refugees, the state and Jerusalem... The Arab leaders must preoccupy themselves with what is good for their people who will ultimately forgive them if they could not convince the Israelis of peace and could say no's they capable of achieving: no to tyranny; no to corruption; no to backwardness, no's that should have been launched in Khartoum four years ago. We were not defeated by the Israeli military machine alone, but by the superiority of the enemy's society and state from all economic and political aspects. The enemy's heroes who had defeated all the Arab armies were themselves defeated in the ballot boxes. But the heroes of our defeat were vanquished only by the prince of death, as if death is the only effective tool of change in the Arab world." HALE