Weekly Arab Press Review (fwd)

["Clement M. Henry" <chenry@mail.la.utexas.edu>]

*****************************
Clement M. Henry
Professor of Government
University of Texas at Austin
Austin TX 78712
tel 471-5121, fax 471-1061

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 14:30:52 +0300 (AST)
From: Arab Press <arabpress@csfs-kuwait.org>
To: alnakib@csfs-kuwait.org
Subject: Weekly Arab Press Review

                           Weekly Arab Press Review
                             # 9 : Nov. 18, 2002

                  The Center for Strategic and Future Studies
                              Kuwait University

The Center for Strategic and Future Studies is a Kuwaiti think-tank,
affiliated with Kuwait University, and is directed by Dr. Shafeeq Ghabra.

The following report reviews the comments and reactions of Arab op-ed writers
in a selection of 13 Arabic newspapers, on the prevailing news issues in the
Arab world each week.

This week’s issue:  UN resolution 1441 – Saddam’s options

Ghassan Tweini, Director General of An-nahar newspaper, addressed an open
letter to Saddam Hussein in An-nahar newspaper (Lebanon, Nov. 11), saying
that “resignation is more honorable.”  “Arabs still have a chance of peace
through the use of your resignation in a historic initiative to end your era
without destruction, bloodshed and occupation, an initiative allowing Arabs to
turn over the table on the United States and Israel by tendering (after your
approval) your resignation and get into the international game with this last
card to refute the pretexts of war.”  Tweini added that “what happened in the
Security Council proves that the United States has not changed its position.
The decision to overthrow Saddam Hussein has been made and is being put into
effect, resolution 1441 being the first chapter of this plan.  In other words,
the resolution, if implemented, will certainly lead to the end of Saddam
Hussein’s regime.”

Jordanian writer Raja Talab said in al-Rai newspaper (Jordan, Nov. 13), that
it is not an exaggeration to say that the resolution 1441 is the most cruel
and humiliating resolution in the history of international relations, a
resolution that destroys the elements of the national sovereignty of a country
that is a member of the United Nations.  The resolution transforms Iraq into
one big inspection area, and therefore the resolution is a war in and of
itself.  The Iraqi regime has no other option but to accept.  Accepting this
resolution is “suicide and not salvation,” as the Iraqi regime has no means
left to postpone U.S. plans, including the option of Saddam’s resignation.

Writer and analyst Rajeh Al-Khouri said in An-nahar newspaper (Lebanon, Nov.
14), that “due to the major difficulty in implementing the resolution, one can
describe the situation as follows: the Security Council invited Saddam Hussein
to go up to the rooftop and throw himself off, or George Bush will do it for
him.  It is a draft that is equal to a decision of execution. “

Jordanian writer Saleh Al-Qallab said in Asharq al-Awsat newspaper (London,
Nov. 14), that the resolution is a tool to cause war rather than avoid it.  It
is a victory for the U.S. Administration and a defeat for Arabs and other
states seeking a role in the international arena.  “The Iraqi leadership has
no choice but to accept this resolution and its onerous conditions.  It is the
worst possible option.  If this is victory, then what is defeat?” added Al-
Qallab.

Saudi writer Yusif Makki, a specialist in comparative politics, said in al-
Watan newspaper (Saudi Arabia, Nov. 13), that the resolution “is only a short
pause on the path to war that the United States has decided to launch against
Iraq, which itself is a prelude to redrawing the political map of the whole
region.”

Randa Taiyeddine, the Paris Bureau Chief of al-Hayat newspaper (London, Nov.
13), urged Saddam Hussein “to learn from his past experience, or at least to
follow Syrian diplomacy and its ability to adapt itself to the super power.”

Lebanese writer and analyst Waddah Sharara said in al-Hayat newspaper (London,
Nov. 13), that “Arabs should urge Saddam to leave Iraq and should contribute
to the establishment of his succession, rather than seek a share in the Iraqi
spoils.”

Writer Abdulkarim Abu Al-Nasr said in al-Watan newspaper (Saudi Arabia, Nov.
12), that “the long-standing battle between Saddam Hussein and the United
States has reached its final stage as the Bush Administration has succeeded to
make the goals of the United States and the Security Council one and the same.”

Liberal Kuwaiti writer and analyst Ayed Al-Mannaa asked in al-Watan newspaper
(Kuwait, Nov. 13), if it is really possible that the Iraqi regime will not
commit a “material breach” to the resolution.  He further asked whether
Saddam’s acceptance of the resolution is not merely an attempt by the regime
to buy time, and to give closed-door diplomacy a chance to bring about what it
failed to achieve in nearly a decade and a half.  He also asked whether the
Iraqi government has realized that a storm more violent that of 1990 is
certainly coming and that grave digging is inevitable.

An editorial in al-Ahram newspaper (Cairo, Nov. 11), said that “Iraq is facing
a historic moment that will have important impacts on the entire Arab region.
Courage often lies in wise decisions and not in those made under the pressure
of provocation.”

Ibrahim Nafea, editor-in-chief of al-Ahram newspaper, said (Cairo, Nov. 11),
that the resolution is a substantial opportunity to continue weapons
inspections in Iraq, which could avert a military strike, and might even lead
to the lifting of sanctions.

Writer Abdelwahab Badrakhane said in al-Hayat newspaper (London, Nov. 11),
that the U.S. Administration succeeded in leading the international community
to get on board its war train, which was not initially on the world’s agenda.
The matter now depends on the U.S. will and maneuvers.  Moreover, the United
States also managed to contain any questioning of its plans toward Iraq,
including its plans for regime change and the possible occupation of the
country.

Liberal Kuwaiti Parliament member Ahmed Al-Rubei said in Asharq al-Awsat
newspaper (London, Nov. 11), that “if the United States wages war on Iraq,
which is most probable, nobody has the right to say that Syria deceived the
Arabs [by voting for the resolution], as the U.S. decision is made in
Washington and not in Damascus.  When the United States decides to hit the
Iraqi regime it will not even consult with its allies in Paris and Moscow, let
alone Syria.”

Jordanian writer and analyst Fahd Al-Fanek said in al-Rai newspaper (Jordan,
Nov. 11), that “once again, the United States has an Arab cover-up for its
plan to hit Iraq, which is Syria’s vote for the resolution.”  He said that it
is untrue that a Syrian abstention would have barred the United States from
striking Iraq, for resolution 1441 is a U.S. decision that would have passed
anyway, with or without Syria’s vote.

Writer Zuheir Kuseibati said in al-Hayat newspaper (London, Nov. 10),
that “Syria’s vote for resolution 1441 was not surprising for it knows that an
abstention would cost Syria complete isolation.  Whatever the announced
justifications for its voting, Syria knows as well as other Arabs the outcome
of standing in the face of the U.S. storm.”

Liberal Kuwaiti analyst and writer Ahmad Beshara said in al-Qabas newspaper
(Kuwait, Nov. 11), that resolution 1441 could be described as “the mother of
all resolutions,” as it has put Iraq in a serious dilemma.  The time for
change in Iraq has come, and the demise of the Iraqi regime has been brought
about by all those who voted for the resolution, including the Arab group
represented by Syria and the Muslim group represented by Malaysia.  Whoever
believes that they served Iraqi interests by voting for the resolution was
either misinformed, or did so to serve his own interests.

Kuwaiti writer Muhammad Al-Rumeihi said in al-Rai al-Aam newspaper (Kuwait,
Nov. 12), that “the time for maneuvering and postponing has come to an end.
Though the outbreak of a war has become most probable, other possibilities are
still conceivable: Saddam and his entourage have the possibility to give up
power under an international agreement, and Saddam is working on that now.
This ideal solution could get the approval of the United States and other
concerned countries in the next few weeks, but if this option is delayed it
will be difficult to accept in the 25th hour,” he added.

Jordanian writer Osama Al-Sherif said in al-Dostour newspaper (Jordan, Nov.
11), that Iraqi regime should take the initiative, face the dark reality of
the conditions the Iraqi people are living under, and initiate real reforms.
If it does so, the United States would not dare to carry out strikes against a
country that is taking steps toward democracy and pluralism; that is, if
Saddam’s ultimate goal is really Iraq’s salvation and not the regime’s.

_________________________________________
Center for Strategic and Future Studies
Kuwait University
Tel : (+965) 483-4197
Fax : (+965) 482-4645