21 March

By Daniel Kimmage

Britain's "Al-Quds al-Arabi" (pan-Arab, Palestinian expatriate): The editors denounce the war and the Arab inaction that abets it.

     "The American massacre began last night in Baghdad, Mosul, Nasiriyah, and most other Iraqi cities. Smoke and tongues of flame rose from residential neighborhoods. The news was of thousands burned to death or crushed beneath the rubble. American weapons of mass destruction are pounding Iraq's children and destroying its infrastructure in a genocidal war with no historical precedent.

     "Shame on the Arab nation that stands watching this crime. Shame on the nation that stands by and watches as steadfast Baghdad is burned and destroyed.

     "Shame on the Arab leaders who are content to blame the Iraqi regime and hold it responsible for what has happened. It listened to their advice, did their bidding, and cooperated with inspectors and the resolutions of the United Nations.

     "No words can describe how the Arabs have betrayed this fraternal country and its people. Nor can they describe the destructive American hate for this nation. Pictures speak louder than words, yet their eloquence has brought no blush of shame to the faces of Arab leaders."

Britain's "Al-Quds al-Arabi" (pan-Arab, Palestinian expatriate): Abd al-Bari Atwan condemns the war and foresees bitter resistance.

     "To write in the language of analysis and reason becomes a form of collaboration as fires blaze in Baghdad's buildings and mosques, incinerating its innocent inhabitants, its children. It is a sin no less than the sin of masking this aggression by laying blame on the Iraqi leadership. It is a flight from the moral responsibility of standing at the side of a fraternal country that faces the greatest massacres in history.

     "Iraq will become a base for resistance, as was the case in Afghanistan and Beirut. The resistance to come will be a greater danger to the west and the United States than Al-Qaeda and the ruling Ba'ath regime."

Britain's "Al-Sharq al-Awsat" (pan-Arab, Saudi-owned): Samir Atallah writes that the war is Saddam Hussein's attempt to engineer his own exit into history.

     "The Iraqi president, who took refuge in poetry and a bunker to avoid America's avowed pursuit of the entire Iraqi leadership, knows that this is a war in which heads will roll. He knows that never before has a country announced that it is bombing with the aim of assassinating a specific person. This is why he has decided to enter history. This is the final stop in his long, hard journey into the world of politics, leadership, and war...."

Britain's "Al-Sharq al-Awsat" (pan-Arab, Saudi-owned): The editors predict that the changes to come after the war in Iraq will affect the very fabric of Arab and Islamic societies.

     "The world changed after the attacks of 11 September. It would hardly be an exaggeration to say that, even by the standards of the post-11 September world, the world that emerges after the war in Iraq will be different. International relations, with their alliances and oppositions, are only one part of this. Many expect that the world to come will also differ in the fabric of internal relations within many societies, and primary among them Arab and Islamic societies."

Egypt's "Al-Ahram": The editors hope against hope that the United States will "listen to reason" and give international inspectors a final chance to effect a peaceful resolution.

     "Each passing day brings to light new details of the United States' secret agenda and the extent of the tragedy that the world will suffer because of the decision to opt for a military solution. Everyone will pay the price -- the international community, the American people, the United Nations, and, of course, the Iraqi people.

     "The international community needs to take effective, concerted action, and the Arab world must be at the forefront of these forces. They must seize the initiative to save the region from this destructive war and to preserve the consciousness and understanding that can eliminate the potential fallout from this catastrophic war.

     "Everyone hopes that the United States will listen to the voice of the world's conscience, which rejects war, and to the voice of reason, which calls for peace. These voices stress the need to give international inspectors a full opportunity to complete their task in Iraq for the sake of peace and stability for everyone, not only the Iraqi people.

     "This hope is neither difficult nor impossible. The roar of cannons in many an armed conflict has been silenced when courageous wisdom triumphed over mad rage."

The United Arab Emirates' "Al-Bayan": The editors mourn the eclipse of the United Nations and lament a dark day in Arab history.

     "The danger of American aggression against fraternal Iraq is that there is no longer any respect for international law. America told the world yesterday that it has renounced all international customs and accords. It holds the world under its fist and will do with it what it wishes. We do not exaggerate when we say that what America did yesterday was to put an exclusively American seal on the death certificate of the United Nations.

     "American military aggression is destroying the system of international security, not threatening it. No one will stop America. Even the voices of the masses all over the world carry no weight in the White House.

     "The world is dismayed at what America has done. Yesterday was a sad day for all Arabs, yet another dark day in our history. We stood by powerless and resigned, as though we approve of what is happening."

Britain's "Al-Hayat" (pan-Arab, Saudi-owned): Walid Shuqayr describes the uniqueness of the American endeavor in Iraq, and the mistakes that may undermine it.

     "It does not matter whether it takes days or weeks -- George W. Bush will become the first American president of an Arab country....

     "...For the first time in history, or at least since the end of the wars of independence, one country will put an end to another country's independence 70 years after it gained that independence.

     "For the first time since the Second World War, the United States will undertake the full-scale, long-term occupation of another country.

     "For the first time in history, the United States will undertake an occupation in the Arab world. Even Israel (although it is not a state, since it arose through theft and colonization) never occupied the entire territory of an Arab country.

     "The tremendous capabilities of 'first time' weaponry will validate many of America's plans, first among them George Bush's 'presidency' in Iraq.

     "Just as some of America's calculations are correct -- first among them that Iraqi President Saddam is hated by his people, who have suffered so much at his hands -- experience shows that Washington was often mistaken as it prepared for war. It didn't expect that France, Russia, Germany, and China, as well as the small African, Latin [American], and Asian would act as they did. It didn't expect that millions of people would take to the streets in America itself. It was wrong in its evaluation of the Iraqi opposition, its reading of the internal situation in Iraq, and its influence there. And there might be other mistakes in the future...."

Britain's "Al-Hayat" (pan-Arab, Saudi-owned): Raghida Dargham warns that success in Iraq could encourage dangerous illusions in Washington.

     "Iraq might be better off in American hands than under Saddam Hussein's despotic regime and the Security Council sanctions that have broken the back of ordinary Iraqis and torn apart the social fabric of Iraq. Theoretically, the American occupation could succeed in moving Iraq to a new threshold of vitality and democracy, making it a model to be emulated in the region. In reality, however, we need to scrutinize the organizations that will dominate Iraq and reshape it. We need to know what their aims and goals are both in Iraq and in the Middle East.

     "The war could be short. It might not cause many civilian casualties. Iraqis might leave their homes to greet the American forces of 'liberation.' But if this happens, it will only increase the intoxicating delusions that afflict the group of extremists in Washington, making them more frightening and dangerous.