MEDIA REACTION ON MIDDLE EAST CONFLICT

UNCLAS AMMAN 005352

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 MIDDLE EAST CONFLICT

Editorial Commentary

"Reconsidering priorities and alliances in the face of the
explosion"

Columnist Fahd Khitan writes on the inside page of independent,
mass-appeal Arabic daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm (07/17): "As far as the
Jordanian officials are concerned, an explosion in the region was
expected, but the surprise is the confrontation started in Lebanon
between Hizbollah and Israel and not between Washington and Iran....
The aggression against Lebanon has become comprehensive and
destructive with Israeli bombs falling on Syria's borders. Syria
threatens to retaliate without limits and Israel is ready for all
solutions and is not planning to pass on the opportunity to settle
all the issues. After all, Hizbollah cannot be fought in the south
while Hamas is left a thorn in its side. The moment to impose
Olmert's plan without any care or concern for the interests of
neighbors or treaties might be at hand. What does that mean for
Jordan? It means that priorities need to be revisited. The ongoing
explosion in the region cannot be faced with proposals, projects and
predisposed ideas. Trusting too much Washington's stand and the
intimate treaty with Olmert are not going to do us any good on the
day of the raid. Parties like Israel and AMERICA think only of
their interests in cold blood and do not any care for the fate of
others. There must now be a movement to create an Arab front that
would be completely independent from the American-Israeli alliance
in order to protect Jordan from the Israeli monster and to protect
Syria from aggression and Lebanon and Iraq from division."

-- "Not Iranian"

Columnist Nahed Hattar writes on the back-page of independent,
mass-appeal Arabic daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm (07/17): "Linking between
Hizbollah's conflict with Israel on the one hand and easing
pressures on Iran over the nuclear issue on the other might, in
theory, be logical, but this logic soon dissipates once we think
about whether Tehran wants to hurry up the American war against it.
The answer to that is no. The Iranian ruling regime seeks to strike
a deal with the United States and believes that it has some strong
ace cards to play, including Hizbollah. Yet, Hizbollah becomes
neither an ace card nor a tool if it starts the attack itself....
Hizbollah's initiative to attack actually stems from a non-Iran
related motive, rather from the necessity dictated by the interests
of the Arab Shi'aism which was detrimentally harmed as a result of
Iran's pragmatic connections since 2001, the conspiratorial
understanding between the Iranian regime and the United States in
Afghanistan, and most of all, in Iraq, where Iran's expansion policy
in cahoots with the Americans turned the Iraqi Shi'a from people
qualified to lead the country into a 'base' for the American
project. This greatly harmed the reputation, the capacity and the
role of Arab Shi'aism at the Arab level, and led to the rise of the
phenomenon of Sunni-Shi'a division that is almost turning into a
civil war in Iraq. The biggest loser from the Iranian policy in
Iraq was Hizbollah.... The inertness, even political vacuum, at the
Arab level, the possibility of reconciliation between Iran and
America, the sectarian crisis suffered by the Iraqi resistance ...
followed by the heavy Israeli strike against the Hamas government in
the context of the Israeli project to liquidate the Palestinian
cause; all of that was bothering Hizbollah and warning it of the
possibility of strategic exposure and the decay of its position and
role in Lebanon."

-- "Priority is for supporting the Lebanese government and
protecting the Lebanese people"

Columnist Batir Wardam writes on the op-ed page of center-left,
influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour (07/17): "The regional formula
is quite clear. Lebanon is the only one that is going to pay the
price. The Iranian President allies with the American imperialism
in Iraq and opposes in theory in Lebanon, and declares that he is
ready to defend Syria if it is attacked by Israel ... but he does
not defend Lebanon, and none of those who got Lebanon into this
crisis and cheer it on are going to defend the Lebanese people. The
Arab stand must be stronger and more severe and must be directed at
supporting the Lebanese government. Otherwise, all the keys to the
game will end up in the hands of Hizbollah and the aggressive Israel
and anyone else planning an escalation in the region. The Arabs
must work hard against the Israeli aggression and the American
foolishness in order to protect the Lebanese people from turning
into fuel for a new war in the Middle East."
-- "The war has what is beyond"

Columnist Abu Yazan writes on the op-ed page of center-left,
influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour (07/17): "We are before a war
that is happening in Lebanon but its parties, accounts and fallout
will affect the entire region, and will have what is beyond it in
terms of results and affects on the balance of power in each
country, specifically between the regimes and the Islamic movements,
Sunni and Shi'a.... We are willing risk saying that the dust of
this battle, once it settles, will uncover an effective presence for
the Arab Islamic trend, Sunni and Shi'a. The Arab official regimes
were never good at, and in fact have failed miserably in waging the
'peace battle'.... As for Arab citizens, mesmerized in front of TV
screens watching the scenes of the great crime unfold in Lebanon,
Palestine and Iraq, they are no longer impressed by anything and
their longing and thirst for pride, dignity and vengeance is no
longer quenched except by the images of Hassan Nasrallah and the
Palestinian and Iraqi resistance. Whoever listens to the bitter
sarcasm by which Arab citizens comment about current events would
realize all too well the widening gap between the citizen and the
ruler.... I wonder now whether the question "why do they hate us"
will be asked by the Arab leaders, as the Americans have done
following the 9/11 attacks?"

-- "Inside the box"

Centrist, elite English daily Jordan Times (07/17) editorializes:
"Not only the Lebanese and Arabs but any educated, broad-minded
person equipped with the necessary tools that do not allow him to
succumb to the mighty propaganda machine have, over the past few
days, all the reasons to be furious at the coverage by major US
networks of the tragedy unfolding in Lebanon.... Taking the notion
of bias to new extremes, some newscasters have gone to the extent of
censoring Israeli officials' declarations, omitting from their
reports those passages that betrayed the brutality and disproportion
of Israel's military retaliation. Utmost effort is being exerted to
present Israel's attacks as specifically targeted against Hizbollah,
even when bridges and airports are bombed.... All means, subtle or
overt, are exploited to relay the magnitude of Hizbollah attacks and
Israeli suffering, but Lebanese suffering and Israeli attacks are
not treated in the same way. On one American news channel, the
correspondent from Israel sported a thick bulletproof vest, while
his colleague from Beirut was wearing only his shirt. It is
immediately known when there are women and children amongst the
Israeli dead. But the Lebanese dead are just numbers.... Yeah,
American media are free. Free to parrot Israeli propaganda."

"How do the Arabs deal with Hizbollah's 'adventure'"

Columnist Fahd Khitan writes on the inside page of independent,
mass-appeal Arabic daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm (07/16): "Hints of a
comprehensive confrontation are looming in the region. People see
in it a way out of the state of humiliation that has afflicted the
Arab body, despite the pains and horrors that wars entail. The
official Arab leaderships are almost outside the picture. There is
talk, maybe truthful, about an Iranian interest in what is going on.
But where is the counter Arab interest in all of this? In the
current status quo and in light of the official Arab stand, Israel
is the only beneficiary. What I want to say is that rallying public
opinion around a stance that is skeptical and doubtful of
Hizbollah's motives and objectives of starting a confrontation does
the Arabs no good, unless the Arab leaderships provide a convincing
alternative for the people in the face of the American and Israeli
arrogance. The game of just and comprehensive peace ended up, as
far as Israel is concerned, into a 'a Palestinian capsule' known as
the state, as political thinker Adnan Abu Odeh had said, and freedom
in Iraq after the elimination of the 'tyrant', as the Americans
state, is an operation that is nearing a tragic conclusion for the
Iraqis and the Arabs. In this scene, how can others be stopped from
looking for a way out? True, what Hizbollah is doing is an
adventure, and Hassan Nasrallah acknowledged that. The next weeks
may see difficult days. All the players are egging for a
confrontation that would be similar to the World Cup Soccer final.
But can the Arabs do anything other than condemn Hizbollah and then
Iran? If their action is limited to that condemnation, then Israel
will be very happy with them indeed."

-- "The absence of an Arab solution is disastrous"

Chief Editor Taher Odwan writes on the back-page of independent,
mass-appeal Arabic daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm (07/16): "We have reached
the stage of sorting stances and alliances, because Hizbollah's
military initiative and the comprehensive war it started with Israel
has put the Arab regimes before two options: either support
Hizbollah and practically stand in the Iranian camp, or stand by
Israel and of course America. It is something that Saudi Arabia,
Egypt and Jordan tried not to be dragged into, as they chose to
adopt a completely different stand, or a third option, namely
condemning the Israeli aggression on Lebanon, calling on the
international community to intervene, and at the same time blaming
Hizbollah for the 'adventure', describing it as part of a regional
scenario that does not serve Lebanese and Arab interests. Such an
Arab political stand, which is completely different to previous ones
vis-`-vis Israeli aggressions, is not enough, because it is a weak
political stand when faced with the heat of battles and the sorting
of alliances.... Such an Arab stand that refuses to choose between
the camp of Tel Aviv and Washington on one hand and the camp of
Hizbollah-Damascus-Tehran on the other will ultimately serve the
American-Israeli camp.... What is required is an Arab solution that
convinces the Arab people first and foremost that their countries
are capable of protecting them from American-Israeli-Iranian
aggressions.... What is happening in Lebanon, Palestine and Iraq is
the result of the vacuum in the region that was created by the Arab
absence when all the eggs were placed in the American basket."
HALE