JORDAN: JANUARY 12 MEDIA REACTION TO GAZA

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 AMMAN 000089

SIPDIS

STATE FOR NEA/ELA, NEA/PPD, IIP/GNEA

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: OPRC KPAO KMDR JO
SUBJECT: JORDAN: JANUARY 12 MEDIA REACTION TO GAZA

AMMAN 00000089 001.2 OF 002



1. SUMMARY: Accusations that Israel is using white phosphorus in
attacking Gaza's populated areas led front-page coverage by Jordan's
major news outlets on Monday. King Abdullah's demand that Israel
abide immediately by UNSCR 1860 and that the international community
"coerce" Israel into doing so topped local coverage. Op-ed
commentary looked for U.S. culpability in Israel's offensive. END
SUMMARY.


2. All major newspapers published today in Jordan ran banner
headlines accusing Israel of using white phosphorus in attacking
Gaza's most heavily populated areas. Sources included Gaza-based
medics and civilians, along with statements by Human Rights Watch
representatives to the pan-Arab satellite channel Al-Jazeera. The
dailies combined these headlines with the official Jordan News
Agency account of King Abdullah's statements during his Sunday
meeting in Amman with Palestinian President Abbas, in which he said
that Israel "should immediately abide by the Security Council
Resolution 1860... and that it is the responsibility of the
international community to coerce Israel to implement the Security
Council resolution."


3. Coverage uniformly included the Jordan News Agency account of
Foreign Minister Bashir's meeting with Amman-based ambassadors of
the five permanent member states of the UN Security Council. Bashir
reportedly conveyed Jordan's condemnation of Israel's ongoing
offensive, saying "What we are seeing is a flagrant violation
committed by Israel against the international law including its
rejection of international resolutions and its indiscriminate and
intensive bombardment using internationally banned weapons."


4. Newspapers also reported on Sunday's relatively small public
protests, highlighting a demonstration yesterday by UNRWA employees
in Amman, some of whom carried banners reading "Zionists, Killers of
Children" and "We Are All With You Gaza."


5. Editorial Commentary

-- "American Partnership in the Aggression on Gaza"

Columnist Nicola Nasser in the January 12 edition of the
independent, opposition Arabic daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm posits, "This
American partnership in the aggression is not just diplomatic, as
was evident from the American position last week that prevented the
passing of a binding UNSC resolution to immediately halt the
aggression. Despite the importance of the American political and
media support for the Israeli aggression on Gaza, the military
support that does not get sufficient coverage is no less important.
The war planes that are killing the children, the women, the elderly
and entire families... without distinguishing between civilians and
resisters, Hamas and Fatah members, Muslims and Christians... are
paid for by the American, European, and Japanese taxpayers.... Not
only are those planes that are American-made, but also their
phosphorous ammunition and deep-exploding bombs. These are all
financed by America and the occupation spends nearly four billion
dollars on them from annual American assistance that Washington pays
to Tel Aviv."

-- "Gaza Victims and 9/11 Victims"

Columnist Mahjoob Zweiri in the January 12 edition of the
independent Arabic daily Al-Ghad reasons, "The political discourse
that dominates the analysis of the war on Gaza goes in two clear
directions. The first seems to be coordinated in the sense that it
focuses on Gaza events as a separate event from what happened
before. Therefore, news treatment is crude, highlighting...rocket
launches from Gaza as the motive for the war on Gaza.... The second
seems to be retroactive in the sense that what is happening is one
link in the chain of Israel's assaults against the Palestinian
people.... Amidst these two discourses lies a tug-of-war of
analyses and observations of the massacre in Gaza. This probably
leads us to draw a type of comparison between the reaction to the
killing of civilians in Gaza and what happened on September 11,

2001. The killing of around 3,000 unarmed civilians in New York and
Washington was seen as unjustified. The response was two wars
against two countries, Afghanistan and Iraq, under the moniker of
the war on terrorism.... The international community was affected
and moved by the images of those civilians, but it has not been
moved by the deaths of more than 800 civilians, of whom almost 300
are children, and by the fact that it was killing upon the will of a
political entity that is a member of the United Nations bound to
respect the so-called international law."

-- "Palestine in the Priority of the Strategic Compass"

Columnist Dr. Amr Hamzawy in today's Al-Ghad opines, "The choice
between the option of a peace settlement and the option of armed
resistance is a legitimate one, in fact, is required if the
strategic compass of Palestinian action is to be determined.
Although the growing role of Hamas, which is pro-armed resistance
and anti-settlement, has changed the Palestinian internal formula a
great deal, the heavy price of Hamas' resistance, which is paid by

AMMAN 00000089 002 OF 002


the lives of Palestinian civilians, and its limited impact on the
Israeli military machine, and in view of the current unsuitable
regional and international circumstances, forces us to look at the
conditions of the armed resistance and the issue of balancing
between this resistance and the negotiations. This comparison
between the two options is the core of the Palestinian issue today.
Its determination and conclusion... is dependent on the factions of
the Palestinian national movement, especially Fatah and Hamas. This
is why it becomes important to begin an immediate serious dialogue
among the factions... in order to push towards a binding preference,
either for the negotiations, despite the maneuvering involved, or
for the armed resistance, despite its heavy cost, and then unite the
Palestinian ranks on such preference."

BEECROFT