6 - 14 August

Compiled by Kathleen Ridolfo

NOTE: The next Arab Press review will be issued on 29 August.

Cairo's "Al-Akhbar al-Yawm" (9 August): Majdi Kamil in a column entitled "The Search for a Double" praises Arab states for refusing to send peacekeepers to Iraq.

     "Hollywood being a cult among them, the Americans seem to have found in doubles a way out of their troops' predicament in Iraq. They search for troops from other countries to play in their stead the role of doubles or, more definitely, act as bulletproof human shields for their troops.

     "The Arab countries are, of course, among those the Americans have tried to induce into sending troops to Iraq. But the Arabs refused, as the [recent] Arab summit follow-up committee said.... They even emphasized they would recognize and deal with none in Iraq except a legitimate government.

     "The Arabs did well. They know that sending troops to Iraq, Arab troops in particular, lends Arab legitimacy to the occupation and helps the Americans out of their embarrassment before the world. It means giving the Americans the fig leaf with which to conceal the calamities they have caused Iraq and, more dangerously, get rid of the burdensome task of setting to rights the wrongs they have done, [allowing] them to freely collect the harvest without their hands getting scratched.

     "The Arabs have adamantly refused to play a double's role. It is said who starts a tragedy must bring it to an end."

Amman's "Al-Arab al-Yawm" (12 August): Samih al-Ma'ayitah praises Kuwait's past support for Arab states, but criticizes the Kuwaiti government's recent actions in an editorial entitled "Asking the Palestinians to Denounce Mass Massacres and To Apologize is the Latest Example. Kuwait Seeks To Capitalize on the U.S. Victory and Exact Revenge."

     "...Since the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990, the Kuwaiti government's and people's mood and stand toward their brothers have changed. Some factions in Kuwait even went to the extreme in distancing themselves from the Arab nation, citing the events of 1990 as justification. This mood developed into a well-established stand that made Kuwait enthusiastically biased toward military aggression against Iraq....

     "After the downfall of the regime of Saddam Hussein, Kuwait became one of the victorious states and perhaps felt a sense of elation after it revenged against Saddam and Iraq. This sense of elation was a dream for many of Iraq's adversaries and enemies in the past.

     "Some political circles in Kuwait might have sensed that they have an opportunity, which might not recur, to take revenge against other parties that partly relied on Iraq.... [Thus,] Kuwait refuses to receive Palestinian Prime Minister Abu Mazin [Mahmud Abbas] unless the latter submits to its condition that he apologize for the PLO's stand on the events of 1990.

     "...The whole exercise is no more than a political activity by the [Palestinian Authority] prime minister and it might not be more than a protocol visit. Such a visit will not be a key to victory and liberation for the Palestinians who were let down by their nation and international community.

     "As far as we are concerned here in Jordan, we highly value any Kuwaiti or Arab stand in helping us deal with the negative effects of the war. However, there is a difference between a support based on brotherhood and sense of duty and a political circumstance being exploited."

     "...Also, we hope that decision makers in Kuwait will not contemplate capitalizing on the U.S. victory in order to extract statements from their brothers, which do nothing other than stress that these brothers were wrong and the policy of lining up behind the U.S. flag was right.

     "Many peoples and states remember how magnanimously and sincerely the Iraqis supported their brothers.... We never heard that the Iraqi brothers, in spite of their predicament and suffering, exercised blackmail or sought political revenge against their brothers. In fact, Iraq responded to some parties' offensive stands toward it with kindness, not out of weakness or a desire to avoid political wrangling, but in adherence to an original Arab practice, which is free of opportunism."

London's "Al-Zaman" (12 August): The newspaper in an editorial entitled "Settle Your Accounts Away From Iraq" calls on Iraq's neighbors not to interfere in the country's internal affairs, and vice versa.

     "It is the duty of whomever assumes political action in Iraq to bear in mind that Iraq enjoys an influential geopolitical position. Thus, it must be protected against the winds of intervention. This duty is redoubled under the current circumstances, as any wind can cause great havoc.

     "It would be useful, now and before it is too late, for the Iraqi political and social forces to realize what they have been preoccupied away from for a reason or other. Hence, they should revamp the political scene with mechanisms to activate the principle of nonintervention in [other people's] affairs. This is a two-way principle that reassures neighboring countries and other countries in the region that the Iraqis are not interested in interfering in the affairs of any country. At the same time, it stresses Iraq's right that these countries not interfere in its affairs, and blocks the road before any attempt to turn Iraq into a theater for settling accounts among these countries or among them and the United States.

     "There must be a clear Iraqi message to the effect that any country that wishes to embark on a political or any other confrontation with the Americans can do so somewhere else, and not in Iraq. Whoever is truly concerned about Iraq's interest must assist its sons, and not embroil them in battles from which Iraq would not benefit. Besides, involving Iraq in any conflict would start afire the flames of which will reach all neighboring countries. Therefore, interest -- and logic, of course -- dictates serious and sound contributions to achieve stability in Iraq as soon as possible, and not explode the security situation there.

"Al-Sharq al-Awsat" (13 August): The Saudi newspaper in an editorial entitled "Positive Arab Reservation About the Administration in Iraq" praises the Arab League's decision to not formally recognize the Iraqi Governing Council.

      "The position on the administration currently ruling Iraq, which the Arab follow-up committee that met within the framework of the Arab League adopted, has caused some disappointment to the Iraqi people and to Arabs in general. This position has also incensed the U.S. administration, which perhaps expected the Arab countries to adopt a more positive and supportive stance regarding its plan for rebuilding a new Iraq following the overthrow of the dictatorial regime that had ruled the country for more than three decades. The question here is this: Was it easy for the Arab countries to 'participate' in or support the U.S. military rule that emerged in Baghdad following the war that ended with the occupation of the county, and to recognize the provisional [Governing] Council that was appointed by a U.S. decision? The question is sound particularly because the official Arab stand was from the beginning opposed to the war.

     "The reservation the Arab foreign ministers expressed about what is happening in Iraq was the only logical and realistic stance before them, especially because this stance has not closed the door to cooperation with the interim Governing Council, nor with the United Nations, in addressing all economic and humanitarian spheres that represent the primary and major concern affecting the Iraqi people.

      "The impact of the political and military upheavals that occurred in the wake of the 11 September [2001] events -- primarily the war on Iraq, the occupation of the country, and the overthrow of the former regime by military force -- continues to reverberate. None of the parties that caused or participated in those upheavals can address or decide on the consequences of these upheavals on their own. It is true that the major responsibility falls on the United States, which occupies and rules Iraq. Nevertheless, the Arab and Muslim nations as well as the United Nations and all countries of the world should share in helping to extricate the Iraqi people from the historic and human impasse in which they have been enmeshed. In addition, Iraqi leaders and key figures and their agreement remain a crucial factor in determining the future of Iraq.

      "If the Arab countries close their ranks and unify their stand they will no doubt greatly facilitate and expedite the process of liberating Iraq from occupation and rebuilding it. Everyone knows that since the inception of the Arab League a unanimous Arab stand on one strategy or policy has never been easy except in adopting negative stances. There is no doubt that all Arabs and Muslims share the Iraqi people's suffering and hope that a new era of a free, sovereign, and independent Iraq will begin."