 |
|||||
| September 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//Inter Press Service, Italy--ANALYSIS/IRAQ: HARD TO LEAVE, HARDER TO OCCUPY (In the meantime, five leaders of Iraqi factions that resisted Saddam Hussein's regime have come up with a plan of their own. They have called on U.S. troops to hand over policing and patrolling to their militias, and withdraw to their bases...The U.S. has this week come up with a new deployment idea that partly fits in with the proposal of the five groups. The idea is to make the occupation less conspicuous and to take steps like shortening the 11pm to 4 am curfew in Baghdad. More significant is the possibility, touted by the commander of the U.S. forces in Iraq, Lt.-General Ricardo Sanchez, to withdraw troops from the centre of some cities and hand over security to local authorities.) 2//The Sydney Morning Herald, Australia--US DENIES INDONESIA ACCESS TO HAMBALI (The United States has refused to allow Indonesia to interrogate the suspected terrorist leader Hambali, despite warnings that new attacks planned by him in South-East Asia may be imminent. But Indonesia's senior security minister, Bambang Yudhoyono, visiting Washington, did achieve a compromise to allow his police and intelligence officers to submit a list of questions through US interrogators, who have been interviewing Hambali at a secret location since his capture last month in a joint operation between the CIA and Thai authorities...The US decision to refuse access to Hambali came as The New York Times reported that Hambali, also known as Riduan Isamuddin, had told CIA interrogators of plans to attack two US hotels and commercial airliners in Bangkok, in the lead-up to the APEC summit there next month...The security of Mr Bush's visit to Bangkok is an enormous priority for US intelligence but some ASEAN countries have expressed concerns about the unwillingness of the US to share information on Hambali.) 3//The Moscow Times, Moscow--RUSSIA HARDENS STANCE TOWARD IRAN (Prospects of Russian-Iranian nuclear cooperation dimmed over the weekend as President Vladimir Putin questioned Tehran's reluctance to agree to more comprehensive UN inspections and the nuclear power minister said a key nuclear agreement with Iran would not be signed any time soon...Putin also said Russian intelligence has information that West European and U.S. companies "are cooperating with Iran directly in the atomic sphere."... Nuclear Power Minister Alexander Rumyantsev acknowledged Friday that the agreement was nowhere close to being signed, a development that could delay the scheduled 2005 completion of the Bushehr reactor. "Our talks could last a long time," Rumyantsev told reporters after talks with visiting U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham.) 4//The Independent, UK--BBC'S DYKE IN FURIOUS ATTACK ON BLAIR 'COTERIE' (Greg Dyke, the BBC's director general, has accused "a small coterie" around Tony Blair of putting British television at risk by opening the gates for foreign multinationals to buy up ITV. In an extraordinary outburst, which shook delegates to the Royal Television Society's convention in Cambridge, Mr Dyke added that it is "bullshit" to claim - as the Government does - that the introduction of US managerial skills would mean better programmes on British television screens... It is now widely expected that ITV will be owned by a US media giant such as Viacom, the parent company of CBS and MTV, by the end of the year.) 5//The Japan Times, Japan--PARTY FELL INTO LINE DESPITE DEEP POLICY DIFFERENCES (They're sleeping in the same bed, but dreaming different dreams. The well-known Japanese saying is the best way to describe Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, who has been re-elected head of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party, and many members of the party who voted for him during Saturday's presidential poll...Although most media polls have shown that between 50 percent and 60 percent of voters support Koizumi's re-election as LDP chief, roughly the same percentage disapprove of the prime minister's economic policies and would prefer more stimulus measures...This apparent contradiction has perplexed many anti-Koizumi politicians within the LDP, prompting them to give tentative support to Koizumi's re-election while preparing to rebel once supporting him proves to be no longer personally advantageous in their bids to retain their seats in national elections.) * * * 1//Inter
Press Service September 19, 2003 ANALYSIS By Ferry Biedermann JERUSALEM, Sep 19 (IPS) - Once again Israeli and international media are reporting that the U.S. army is looking at the example of the West Bank and the Gaza strip to learn from the Israelis how to run its occupation of Iraq. Now it is a software programme that supposedly teaches soldiers what to expect. Several months ago there was talk of U.S. officers attending courses in Israel. The first thing that comes to mind is that the United States is pretty desperate if it wants to take a leaf out of Israel's occupation techniques. Ethical or moral implications aside, since the mid-80's the Israeli occupation has not been terribly successful either by military or political standards. All one can say of the Israelis is that they have held on. That, presumably, is not the purpose of the U.S. presence in Iraq. It is remarkable how quickly the level of resentment against the U.S. presence has risen. Even if it does not yet mirror the level of resentment among Palestinians towards Israel, it is rapidly catching up. While there are many complaints about the United States, the overriding feeling is that people just do not like to be occupied. This seems particularly true of an Islamic Arab country occupied by Western Christian powers. The implications for the security situation are overwhelming because even if the large majority of people who are resentful will not take up arms, they do provide a huge pool of tacit support for resistance fighters. Any armed faction, whether Baathist, the al-Qaeda or a fundamentalist group, can tap into that reservoir. (SNIP) In the meantime, five leaders of Iraqi factions that resisted Saddam Hussein's regime have come up with a plan of their own. They have called on U.S. troops to hand over policing and patrolling to their militias, and withdraw to their bases. The five, including two Kurdish factions, the Iraqi National Congress, the Iraq National Accord and the Shia group, the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI) all participate in Iraq's Governing Council that was set up by the occupation authorities. They want to continue cooperating with the U.S. They say, however, that U.S. troops are making a mistake by turning themselves into a "frontline" occupation force. The U.S. has this week come up with a new deployment idea that partly fits in with the proposal of the five groups. The idea is to make the occupation less conspicuous and to take steps like shortening the 11pm to 4 am curfew in Baghdad. More significant is the possibility, touted by the commander of the U.S. forces in Iraq, Lt.-General Ricardo Sanchez, to withdraw troops from the centre of some cities and hand over security to local authorities. (SNIP) A combination of such measures may ease resentment as well as the security risks to U.S. soldiers in Iraq. Since May 1 when U.S. President George W. Bush declared combat operations over, some 160 U.S. soldiers have died in Iraq. There is always a chance that the resentment against the United States will die down anyway as conditions improve in the country, even without much outside support or a significant change in the U.S. security posture. The results of a poll that the U.S.-based Zogby International Agency carried out in Iraq are interesting. The poll found that despite complaints, a substantial majority of Iraqis expect themselves and the country to be better off in five years. Of course, there is always a danger of disappointment.
US DENIES INDONESIA ACCESS TO HAMBALI The United States has refused to allow Indonesia to interrogate the suspected terrorist leader Hambali, despite warnings that new attacks planned by him in South-East Asia may be imminent. But Indonesia's senior security minister, Bambang Yudhoyono, visiting Washington, did achieve a compromise to allow his police and intelligence officers to submit a list of questions through US interrogators, who have been interviewing Hambali at a secret location since his capture last month in a joint operation between the CIA and Thai authorities. Mr Yudhoyono has met the head of the FBI, Robert Mueller, the Deputy Defence Secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, and the Secretary of State, Colin Powell, to discuss co-operation in tackling terrorism and the Hambali case. Hambali was allegedly al-Qaeda's chief operative in South-East Asia and at one time the operations head for Jemaah Islamiah (JI), which organised the Bali bombing. "We believe that Hambali and other people have prepared for other strikes in Indonesia and possibly South-East Asia in general," Mr Yudhoyono told reporters after his meetings in Washington. "So we have to anticipate and we have to prevent that kind of attack from happening. "So our main purpose is getting information from Hambali to stop the kind of attack he might have planned in the past." The US decision to refuse access to Hambali came as The New York Times reported that Hambali, also known as Riduan Isamuddin, had told CIA interrogators of plans to attack two US hotels and commercial airliners in Bangkok, in the lead-up to the APEC summit there next month. Both the Prime Minister, John Howard, and US President, George Bush, are due to attend. The security of Mr Bush's visit to Bangkok is an enormous priority for US intelligence but some ASEAN countries have expressed concerns about the unwillingness of the US to share information on Hambali. (MORE)
RUSSIA HARDENS STANCE TOWARD IRAN Prospects of Russian-Iranian nuclear cooperation dimmed over the weekend as President Vladimir Putin questioned Tehran's reluctance to agree to more comprehensive UN inspections and the nuclear power minister said a key nuclear agreement with Iran would not be signed any time soon. Putin said he sees no good reason why Iran should not sign an additional protocol to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty that would allow the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency to conduct thorough inspections of suspected nuclear sites without notice. "If Iran is not striving to develop nuclear weapons, it has nothing to hide. I see no grounds for refusing to sign these additional protocols," Putin said Saturday at a meeting with U.S. reporters ahead of a summit with U.S. President George W. Bush at Camp David. Putin also said Russian intelligence has information that West European and U.S. companies "are cooperating with Iran directly in the atomic sphere." IAEA's board of directors convened earlier this month to again urge Iran to sign the nuclear protocol and, more important, give Tehran until the end of October to prove that it is not pursing a covert nuclear weapons program. If Iran fails to do so, the IAEA may refer the issue to the UN Security Council, which could impose sanctions on the country. Moscow has repeatedly urged Tehran to sign the protocol and at the same time insisted that Russia will continue to build a nuclear reactor in Bushehr even if Iran does not sign the document. But Moscow also has made it clear that it will not complete the reactor unless Tehran signs an agreement to return spent reactor fuel. Nuclear Power Minister Alexander Rumyantsev acknowledged Friday that the agreement was nowhere close to being signed, a development that could delay the scheduled 2005 completion of the Bushehr reactor. "Our talks could last a long time," Rumyantsev told reporters after talks with visiting U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham. Russian and Iranian officials had promised that the agreement would be signed by October. However, the Nuclear Power Ministry said earlier last week that the signing was being delayed by Iranian demands that Russia pay for the spent fuel, contrary to existing international practice. Addressing a nonproliferation conference Friday, Rumyantsev said he believed the Iranians made the unusual demand because they have yet to "learn" the intricate standards of nuclear cooperation, rather than because they would like to keep spent fuel that could be used to make nuclear bombs. "The delay is of a learning nature rather than a bureaucratic one," Rumyantsev said. He hinted that Tehran may have put the agreement on the backburner to focus instead on how to respond to the IAEA's October deadline. (MORE)
BBC'S DYKE IN FURIOUS ATTACK ON BLAIR 'COTERIE' Greg Dyke, the BBC's director general, has accused "a small coterie" around Tony Blair of putting British television at risk by opening the gates for foreign multinationals to buy up ITV. In an extraordinary outburst, which shook delegates to the Royal Television Society's convention in Cambridge, Mr Dyke added that it is "bullshit" to claim - as the Government does - that the introduction of US managerial skills would mean better programmes on British television screens. His furious attack suggests that the BBC's management is in no mood to sue for peace in its long-running row with the Government, despite the setbacks the corporation suffered during a difficult week at the Hutton inquiry. (SNIP) A senior BBC source conceded for the first time last night that Mr Gilligan's links with the Ministry of Defence have been too badly damaged for him to return to his old job. They also fear that he will be a permanent target of newspapers hostile to the BBC, such as those owned by Rupert Murdoch. While ministers and government advisers insist that there is no connection between the row over Mr Gilligan's journalism and legislation affecting the future of television, BBC managers see the issues as linked in the battle for public support. They believe Labour's defeat in last week's by-election demonstrates that there is more public support for the BBC than for the Government. Mr Dyke directed his fury yesterday at the Government's Communications Act, which received royal assent two months ago, overturning previous legislation that banned foreign companies from bidding for British television franchises. It is now widely expected that ITV will be owned by a US media giant such as Viacom, the parent company of CBS and MTV, by the end of the year. Mr Dyke fears that an "American" ITV will put British culture at risk. He told an audience of the country's most senior broadcasting executives: "I was passionately opposed to the change in the law that allowed American media companies to buy ITV and Channel 5. I think it was nonsense to have done it. I don't think it came from anywhere ... other than a small coterie in Downing Street." He claimed that having protected British broadcasting from American ownership for many years, the Government had "given away" this protection "for nothing - because someone in Downing Street at some stage thought it was a good idea. All that bullshit we were given that it will bring in cash and investment ... is all rubbish". (MORE)
PARTY FELL INTO LINE DESPITE DEEP POLICY DIFFERENCES They're sleeping in the same bed, but dreaming different dreams. The well-known Japanese saying is the best way to describe Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi, who has been re-elected head of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party, and many members of the party who voted for him during Saturday's presidential poll. Most LDP lawmakers still oppose Koizumi's austere reform drive, but they voted for him to take advantage of the prime minister's solid support among the public and protect their own Diet seats in the upcoming Diet elections. (SNIP) Koizumi, though well aware of the ulterior motives of many in his party, nonetheless depended on those lawmakers to be re-elected and keep afloat his reform slogans -- the primary source of his popularity among voters. Both the lawmakers who support Koizumi and those who hate him pretend to be blind to their vast policy differences, although they are aware that they will collide head-on sooner or later, unless one side compromises and bows to the other. Koizumi has stated he is convinced he can "create an atmosphere in which they can change their opinions" during his new tenure, while Upper House heavyweight Mikio Aoki -- who supported his re-election, despite his opposition to Koizumi's reforms -- insisted he believes the prime minister will change his economic policies by listening to his dissenters within the party. And voters, who love Koizumi's reformist zeal but are still demanding a quick economic recovery, appear to be dreaming a different -- maybe impossible -- dream. Although most media polls have shown that between 50 percent and 60 percent of voters support Koizumi's re-election as LDP chief, roughly the same percentage disapprove of the prime minister's economic policies and would prefer more stimulus measures. Extra stimulus measures usually means additional government spending and the issue of more government bonds, which flies in the face of Koizumi's austere fiscal policies. "Voters don't look at the substructure (of what lies underneath Koizumi's reformist policy pledges)," said a senior LDP executive and a close aide to Koizumi. This apparent contradiction has perplexed many anti-Koizumi politicians within the LDP, prompting them to give tentative support to Koizumi's re-election while preparing to rebel once supporting him proves to be no longer personally advantageous in their bids to retain their seats in national elections. (MORE) | |||||
|
©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 |
 |
|||
