 |
|||||
| August 22, 2003 |
|||||
World Media Watch by Gloria R. Lalumia BUZZFLASH NOTE: Once again, these are the views and perspectives of the individual papers, not of BuzzFlash or Gloria. They offer BuzzFlash readers a way of reading what other nations are saying about the crisis, whether we like it or not. We repeat: This is not an endorsement of their viewpoints. * * * 1//Asia Times Online, Hong Kong--IRAQ AND THE ONE-EYED LIAR (Yaqubi was the favorite student of Mohammed Sadiq al-Sadr, an important proponent of the hawza natika who was killed by agents of Saddam in 1999, and thus achieved the status of a revered martyr. His son, the young Muqtada Sadr, has used his father's reputation to galvanize a mass movement that now holds key Shi'ite neighborhoods and mosques throughout Iraq and who has ambitions for national control. Muqtada and Yaqubi are now bitter rivals seeking to embody the hawza natika and eventually rule Iraq.) 2//Institute for War and Peace Reporting, UK--IRAQ: QUELLING SUNNI MILITANCY (Sunni Arabs, who were privileged under the old regime, were left without leadership or any alternative reference point. Their leadership melted away with the regime, and there was nothing to replace it. One immediate - and worrying - consequence is that they are not adequately represented on the ruling council. Since Saddam's departure and the arrival of US forces on their home ground, the Sunnis have moved in several directions...It is this explosive combination of Saddam loyalists, disgruntled tribesmen and Islamic fundamentalists that now forms the core of what is today known as the "Iraqi resistance". They lack a strong centralised leadership, and appear to attack random targets whenever the opportunity arises.) 3//Deutsche-Welle/DW-World.de,
Germany--GERMANY DELIBERATES MILITARY ROLE IN IRAQ (The German
government is coming under mounting pressure
to rethink its attitude towards military involvement in Iraq following
Tuesday's attack on the United Nations in Baghdad. In the past months,
Berlin has used every opportunity to emphasize that it would not
send German soldiers into post-war Iraq, unless there was a clear
U.N. mandate...Despite this stance, the German government was among
the first to condemn Tuesday's bloody attack on the U.N. in Baghdad.
Chancellor Gerhard Schröder and Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer
called it an act that was directed not only against the U.N., but
against the international community as a whole.) 5//Inter Press Service, Italy--NEW DEMOCRACY BRINGS ROYALTY BACK (The royalty of former Yugoslavia, Albania, Romania and Bulgaria is returning to their homelands after decades spent in exile after the end of World War II. The homecoming is not always a return to a palace. Careful not to wake up ghosts of the distant past, they are trying to return as a part of societies they know so little about. Only one, Simeon II of Bulgaria, has access to power. But in a way different from his ruling predecessors. He has a party, a political one. "Simeon II" as it is called, won the parliamentary elections in Bulgaria in 2001. The heir to the throne is now the Bulgarian Prime Minister..."Monarchies were taboo in former communist countries," says analyst Filip Radojicic. "For decades, communists led smear campaigns against them. Only the future will tell whether people in the Balkans really want monarchies." ) * * * 1//Asia
Times Online August 22, 2003 IRAQ AND THE ONE-EYED LIAR BAGHDAD - The al-Rahman mosque sprawls over a huge lot in Baghdad's upper class al-Mansour district. Saddam Hussein began constructing the immense mosque that was originally named after him, and it is still unfinished, raw concrete domes with metal poles dominating the neighborhood's horizon. Immediately after the war, the mosque was taken over by partisans of Muqtada al-Sadr, the young leader of a militant, theocratic movement that dominates Shi'ite politics. Muqtada's control was called into question on Friday, August 15, when supporters of Sheikh Mohammed al-Yaqubi, a rival Shi'ite cleric, demonstrated outside the mosque at the noon prayer time. "Yes, yes for Yaqubi!" they shouted, and condemned Ayatollah Kadhim al-Hairi, a cleric with whom Muqtada is allied. This fitna, or strife, within the "house of Islam", is generally a state that Muslims avoid at all costs. Al-Yaqubi and Muqtada are rivals in the contest to define the direction that Iraqi Shi'ites will take in post-Saddam Iraq. The center of this battle is in a collection of schools called the hawza, or Shi'ite academy, based in Najaf, a shrine city built for Imam Ali, the cousin and son in law of the Prophet Mohammed, regarded by the Shi'ite Ali (or partisans of Ali) as their first leader. Shi'ites comprise over 60 percent of the Iraqi population, and are mobilized by their religious organizations. The hawza has historically been dominated by the traditional Shi'ite view that religious leaders should eschew politics and focus on the spiritual world and on advising their flock. In the 1950s, however, responding to government oppression and encroaching Western secularist trends, a more activists brand of Shi'ism developed. The activist Shi'ites sometimes refer to themselves as the hawza natika, or the outspoken hawza, or the thawra (revolutionary) hawza, or faala (active), and disparagingly view their introverted counterparts as the hawza samita, or silent hawza. Yaqubi was the favorite student of Mohammed Sadiq al-Sadr, an important proponent of the hawza natika who was killed by agents of Saddam in 1999, and thus achieved the status of a revered martyr. His son, the young Muqtada Sadr, has used his father's reputation to galvanize a mass movement that now holds key Shi'ite neighborhoods and mosques throughout Iraq and who has ambitions for national control. Muqtada and Yaqubi are now bitter rivals seeking to embody the hawza natika and eventually rule Iraq. (SNIP) Yaqubi, who avoided specific details about his plans in a manner typical of the general and vague innuendoes used by clerics, did, however, say that it was not necessary for the hawza to directly control Iraq because "if the hawza controls each city independently, then the sum total for management of all cities would be like a government".
IRAQ: QUELLING SUNNI MILITANCY While the rest of Iraq tries to move on, the Sunni Arabs seem unable
to find alternatives to fighting. The bomb which devastated United Nations headquarters in Baghdad, killing at least 20 people including UN envoy Sergio Vieira de Mello, has underlined the need to tackle the roots of the violence as well as those directly involved. The Shia south has also suffered unrest, but there has been fierce, sustained resistance to the occupation only in central Iraq. Why has this Sunni belt - roughly the area between Baghdad, Tikrit and Mosul - seen repeated acts of sabotage and attacks against US soldiers and other targets? It is easy enough to say that the "Sunni triangle" is making trouble because it was Saddam Hussein's heartland. But that is an oversimplification. The current political set up in Iraq - and the legacy of Saddam's rule - offer a few deeper insights. After the fall of Baghdad and the disappearance of Saddam Hussein's regime, Iraq quickly evolved into three distinct political regions: a stable Kurdish north, a relatively calm Shia Arab south, and a Sunni Arab centre that is insecure and in turmoil. Since its inception in 1921, Iraq has been a highly centralised state dominated by a minority Sunni Arab (SNIP) The main players in the south today are the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, SCIRI; the Da'wa Islamic Party; and the "Hawza" - the Shia religious establishment run by prominent clergy. Apart from the Hawza, all these political groupings are represented in the 25-member Governing Council established on July 13. Sunni Arabs, who were privileged under the old regime, were left without leadership or any alternative reference point. Their leadership melted away with the regime, and there was nothing to replace it. One immediate - and worrying - consequence is that they are not adequately represented on the ruling council. Since Saddam's departure and the arrival of US forces on their home ground, the Sunnis have moved in several directions. Some have turned to the mosques, others to their traditional tribal leaders. Both these institutions were allowed to operate openly under the Ba'ath regime, but their role was strictly confined to social and religious matters - they did not interfere in politics. The infrastructure for Saddam's loyalist network - the Ba'ath party and the key state institutions through which he exerted control - has remained untouched. The Americans did not dismantle it when they announced the end of the old regime. They just stopped paying salaries. As a result, Saddam loyalists - many of them key Ba'athists or security service men - went underground and began plotting and launching attacks against "the occupying army", using both the mosques and their tribal connections as cover. In recent years, many mosques in the Sunni triangle had become heavily influenced by the radical Wahhabi trend of Islam, which stems from Saudi Arabia. Members of al-Qaeda and related extremist groups are also reported to be present in some mosques. They began coming in during the run-up to the war, under the guise of "Arab volunteers". Governments in the region have turned a blind eye to such volunteers, since it was rather convenient if potential opponents of their own rule diverted their attention to Iraq. In addition, critics of some of these governments argue that they have little interest in seeing political transition work in Iraq, as that might raise awkward questions about their own less than democratic regimes. Some Sunni tribal leaders, who benefited from patronage under the old regime and feel they have been excluded by the Americans, also object to the US presence in Iraq. It is this explosive combination of Saddam loyalists, disgruntled tribesmen and Islamic fundamentalists that now forms the core of what is today known as the "Iraqi resistance". They lack a strong centralised leadership, and appear to attack random targets whenever the opportunity arises. (MORE)
GERMANY DELIBERATES MILITARY ROLE IN IRAQ The German government is coming under mounting pressure to rethink its attitude towards military involvement in Iraq following Tuesday's attack on the United Nations in Baghdad. In the past months, Berlin has used every opportunity to emphasize that it would not send German soldiers into post-war Iraq, unless there was a clear U.N. mandate. (SNIP) Despite this stance, the German government was among the first to condemn Tuesday's bloody attack on the U.N. in Baghdad. Chancellor Gerhard Schröder and Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer called it an act that was directed not only against the U.N., but against the international community as a whole. German policy should stay the same Foreign ministry spokesman Walter Lindner brushed aside international demands that Germany should assume a military role in Iraq to help secure peace there. He referred to U.N. resolution 1483, which states that it is the responsibility of the coalition forces to maintain stability and secure peace in post-war Iraq. "That hasn't changed a bit after the terrible attack in Baghdad," said Lindner. The spokesman pointed out that Germany was not part of the coalition forces. "We would have liked to see a greater role for the United Nations in the peacekeeping and reconstruction process, but it was not to be. As things are at the moment, there's no reason for the government to rethink its decision not to send German soldiers to Iraq." Yet statements like this have not prevented senior parliament members of the ruling Social Democrat (SPD) and Green parties from thinking ahead and going through all the possible scenarios that might evolve in the wake of Tuesday's attack. The SPD's foreign affairs expert Hans-Ulrich Klose said Berlin should consider that the situation may change. "What if the United Nations requests military protection for its own members in Iraq? That would certainly increase the pressure on the German government to rethink its current stance," said Klose. "What I'm saying is that Berlin should not categorically rule out sending soldiers to Iraq under any circumstances." More power for the Iraqis The Greens' foreign affairs spokesman Ludger Vollmer, however, is skeptical whether an international peacekeeping mission to assist the coalition forces and the U.N. representatives on the ground would provide a solution to the conflict -- and one that would serve the Iraqi people. (SNIP) According to Vollmer, the only solution in the long run is to hand over more power to the Iraqis and keep foreign interference at the lowest possible level. "As everyone can see, we are further away than ever from such a state of affairs."
SONIA GANDHI STAKES CLAIM FOR TOP JOB WITH DENUNCIATION OF VAJPAYEE For years, Sonia Gandhi has struggled to convince Indians that she is fit to wear the mantle of the political dynasty into which she married, let alone to become premier. Her opponents have not allowed the world to forget that she was born in Italy, or that - despite 35 years in India - she has yet to conquer her thick foreign accent when speaking Hindi. They portray her as aloof, out of touch with the vast nation once ruled by her husband, Rajiv, who was assassinated 12 years ago, and her formidable mother-in-law, Indira Gandhi, who was cut down by her own bodyguards in 1984. But India's political pundits gave Sonia Gandhi unusually enthusiastic reviews yesterday after her blistering performance in a no-confidence vote in India's parliament. Their verdict was that she might at last have cemented her leadership. Sonia Gandhi and her allies were always certain to lose the no-confidence vote. The result, 312 to186, was a formality. What was significant, though, was the new forcefulness that she displayed as she laid into the government as "incompetent, insensitive, irresponsible and brazenly corrupt". Five years ago, she was persuaded to assume presidency of the Congress Party, which was riven with divisions and a shadow of its former years. She did not want the job. But now, there was a "new combative quality about her", said Manini Chatterjee, political writer for the Indian Express paper. Another analyst, Mahesh Rangarajan, said her performance was "a major milestone in her evolution as a political leader. She was staking a claim for the top job." (MORE) 5//Inter
Press Service August 19, 2003 NEW DEMOCRACY BRINGS ROYALTY BACK BELGRADE, Aug 19 (IPS) - "Once upon a time there was a prince..." there were quite a few in fact, in the Balkans before communist rule. Now they are returning. The fairy tale is coming true, at least a little. The royalty of former Yugoslavia, Albania, Romania and Bulgaria is returning to their homelands after decades spent in exile after the end of World War II. The homecoming is not always a return to a palace. Careful not to wake up ghosts of the distant past, they are trying to return as a part of societies they know so little about. Only one, Simeon II of Bulgaria, has access to power. But in a way different from his ruling predecessors. He has a party, a political one. "Simeon II" as it is called, won the parliamentary elections in Bulgaria in 2001. The heir to the throne is now the Bulgarian Prime Minister. "It's hard to say if the Balkans are seeing the return of monarchies in the traditional sense," says Serb historian Vasilije Krestic. "It's more like they are trying to find a new place in new societies." Countries in the Balkans now (Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia and Montenegro, Kosovo, Macedonia, Albania, Romania and Bulgaria) were run by communists since the end of World War II. Those regimes crashed at the end of the 1980s and in the 1990s. That opened the doors for a royal return. Many of the returning royalty were born in exile. They were all banned from returning to their homelands. None of them has citizenship of the country of origin, and none speaks the ancestral language. Heir to the throne of former Yugoslavia, Prince Aleksandar II Karadjordjevic, returned to his country only after Slobodan Milosevic fell from power in 2000. His niece, Princess Jelisaveta also returned after Milosevic left. The new government let the Prince move into the court built by his grandfather Aleksandar I. The Prince, the niece and other Karadjordjevics are now waiting to see the old laws on royalty changed. They want the property the communists took away after 1945. (SNIP) In Romania, Mihai (78) did rule his country once, though as a youngster. He was king from 1940 to 1947, when communists forced him to leave. Mihai went to live in Switzerland and spent his life as a test pilot. He said in many interviews he had no idea whether he would ever see his homeland again. But he did, immediately after the regime of Nicolae Ceausescu fell from power in 1989. Special laws granted Mihai the title "Former Head of State" after the fall of communism. He has a state pension and can live on the premises that had been taken away from his family. "Monarchies were taboo in former communist countries," says analyst Filip Radojicic. "For decades, communists led smear campaigns against them. Only the future will tell whether people in the Balkans really want monarchies." | |||||
|
©2003, Gloria R. Lalumia, insight@zianet.com Radio for the Left at http://www.zianet.com/insightanalytical/radio.htm BACK TO TOP |
|||||
 |
||||
| DAILY BUZZ | ||||
| INTERVIEWS | ||||
| ANALYSIS | ||||
| MEDIA LINKS | ||||
|
Unless
otherwise noted, all original |
 |
|||
