World Media Watch for April 12, 2002

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//Ha'aretz, Israel--OP-ED: A CLUB-WIELDING FRIEND (But Sharon made a mistake in thinking of himself as a partner in Bush's war on terror following the September 11 attacks.)

2//Jerusalem Post, Israel-ANALYSIS: BOUNCING THE BALL INTO ARAFAT'S COURT (Nothing better demonstrates the gaps in the US and Israeli positions than the responses from Jerusalem and Washington to Wednesday's suicide bombing near Haifa.)

3//The Daily Star, Lebanon--OPINION: MOMENTUM OF MADRID MUST BE MAINTAINED (Despite the broadened window of opportunity granted to Ariel Sharon's destructive designs in the West Bank by Colin Powell's circuitous route to Israel and the Occupied Territories, it now seems that the US secretary of state and his tendency toward multilateralism are in the ascendancy, eclipsing for now the shortsighted unilateral approach favored by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. This is bad news for Israel's prime minister…)

4//Asia Times Online, Thailand--EXPERTS DISMISS USE OF ARAB ARMS AGAINST ISRAEL (Pro-Western Arab states would not go to war with Israel, despite the urging of some of their citizens, because the United States has a strong military and economic hold over them, say Middle East experts and Arab commentators.)

5//Far Eastern Economic Review, Hong Kong--WRONG TARGET (The United States has returned to Southeast Asia in search of villains but is finding itself involved in local disputes that may have little to do with international terrorism. So it's no surprise to hear critics say that the U.S. is being clumsy and misguided.) Editor's Note: FEER is "wholly owned by Dow Jones & Company, publisher of The Wall Street Journal."

6//The Japan Times, Japan--MINISTERS TELL UNITED STATES TO DROP STEEL CURBS ("We want a positive response on compensation right here today," Hiranuma was quoted as telling Zoellick. "If the U.S. has no intention to compensate, we cannot avoid starting preparations for suspending tariff concessions.")

7//The Guardian, UK--COMMENT: THE FAR RIGHT IS THE ENEMY (The far right is making progress across Europe, inflaming racism and fears over asylum and illegal immigration to secure election victories against the centre left.)

********************************

1//Ha'aretz Friday, April 12, 2002 Nisan 30, 5762 Israel Time: 03:43 (GMT+3)
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=151240&contrassID
=2&subContrassID=4&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y&itemNo=151240

OP-ED: A CLUB-WIELDING FRIEND
By Yoel Marcus

The United States is a great friend of Israel. But we must always remember that this dear friend of ours pats us on the head with one hand and holds a club in the other. Friendship in America's eyes does not mean that people can do whatever they like and drive America batty.

Israeli leaders have always been careful to stay on the side giving out the pats. Every once in a while, some leader would blow his top and say something. Like Menachem Begin, who called in U.S. ambassador Lewis and snapped that "we are not America's vassals."

(SNIP)

From the day he came to power, Sharon has tried to coordinate matters with the U.S. administration. He has kept the secretary of state informed of every move - sometimes beforehand and sometimes afterward, as Begin liked to say. He has correctly read the Bush family map and its long score with Arafat, as well as Bush's reluctance to mediate the conflict lest he suffer the same fate as Clinton. Bush has refused to receive Arafat or meet with him. The U.S. Congress, boasting a conservative, Republican majority that supports Israel, has always been ready to impose sanctions on Arafat.

But Sharon made a mistake in thinking of himself as a partner in Bush's war on terror following the September 11 attacks. Something along the lines of "you and me, we'll fix the world." You take care of the Taliban and Iraq, and we'll deal with Arafat - "our bin Laden." Sharon began to toy with the idea of bumping off Arafat and toppling the Palestinian Authority.

Full of himself as an army general with a specialty in fighting terror, it never sunk in that he and Bush cannot be equal partners in this war. First of all, because most countries regard Palestinian terror as a legitimate way of fighting Israel as an occupier. And second, because Bush needs the solid support of friendly Islamic countries in his bid to knock out those who shelter terrorists, and above all Iraq, but he doesn't need Sharon…

(SNIP)

Bush's strategic agenda is first of all Iraq, and then a series of terrorist-harboring countries and organizations, among them Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad. With growing concern, he has watched Sharon ignore the Saudi proposal, turn Arafat into a worldwide hero and relevant partner by isolating and humiliating him, inflate his government with nationalist ministers and shun all initiatives and displays of political vision.

Sharon has brought the world down on us. He is responsible for the sanctions and embargoes we are now being threatened with, and for Bush's demand that we leave all Palestinian territories immediately. There is no guarantee that Operation Defensive Shield will put an end to terror attacks, but it has done one thing for sure: it has embarrassed and infuriated America.

Refusal to comply with America's request is to provoke the one friend we have left in the world. Not to mention that we have a direct interest in the success of America's war on terrorism, which includes countries and organizations that work against Israel. Better that the club be used on Islamic terror than on us.

2//Jerusalem Post 30 Nisan 5762 03:52Friday April 12, 2002
http://www.jpost.com/Editions/2002/04/12/News/News.46836.html

BOUNCING THE BALL INTO ARAFAT'S COURT
Analysis By Herb Keinon

(April 12) - Nothing better demonstrates the gaps in the US and Israeli positions than the responses from Jerusalem and Washington to Wednesday's suicide bombing near Haifa.

The Bush administration roundly condemned the attack, but said through various spokesmen it shows Israeli military action alone will not stop the suicide bombings.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, on the other hand, said the attack proves the exact opposite: The military operation must continue until the IDF's aims are accomplished.

At the center of Sharon's meeting with Secretary of State Colin Powell this morning will be the question of how to bridge this gap.

Sharon will try to convince Powell of the urgency and importance of finishing the military operation, likely reminding him of what happened in Iraq when a certain military operation was not completed in 1991.

Sharon is also expected to present Powell with "irrefutable" evidence of Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat's direct link to the suicide bombings and the continued terror.

But he will do this while trying not to antagonize the Americans. Sharon is torn between what he considers the country's vital interest in following through with the operation, something he believes will save Israeli lives in the long run, and another critical interest - preserving close and warm relations with the Bush administration.

(SNIP)

The strategy is to bounce the ball back into Arafat's court, confident Arafat will say no to Powell's request for a cease-fire declaration and real steps against terror, just as he said no last month to Vice President Dick Cheney and as he has being saying no for months to Anthony Zinni.

But if US-Israeli interests are currently not converging, neither are US-Palestinian interests.

Arafat is well aware the Europeans are itching to increase their involvement in the region and are waiting to see how Powell fares. The Europeans sent Powell on his way with their support, but also with a subtle warning that if he doesn't succeed in moving the process forward, other actors will need to get involved.

This is precisely what Arafat would like to see - more European involvement.

Secondly, Arafat knows the US wants stability in the region in order to launch an attack on Iraq. But what interest does Arafat have in making the US job easier? Why provide the US with the quiet it seeks? On the proverbial Arab street, Arafat will be a bigger hero if he is the reason the US is not attacking Iraq than if he now agrees to a cease-fire.

3//The Daily Star Beirut, Thursday, April 11, 2002. Updated 08:30 AM +2GMT
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/opinion/11_04_02_a.htm

OPINION: MOMENTUM OF MADRID MUST BE MAINTAINED

Despite the broadened window of opportunity granted to Ariel Sharon's destructive designs in the West Bank by Colin Powell's circuitous route to Israel and the Occupied Territories, it now seems that the US secretary of state and his tendency toward multilateralism are in the ascendancy, eclipsing for now the shortsighted unilateral approach favored by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. This is bad news for Israel's prime minister in that the diplomatic cover for his bloodlust is in the process of being lifted but a welcome sign for those on both sides of the conflict who understand that killing people is a bizarre way to seek peace. Powell's visit to Madrid was more than a symbolic stopover in the city where the principle of land for peace came into its own. He obtained the backing of Russia, the European Union, and the United Nations, resurrecting a quartet whose collective input has been badly undermined by the impotent domination of Washington.

Provided that all of these actors can keep working together in recognition of the fact that none of them alone has the necessary influence, power, and prestige to shepherd the conflict away from the abyss, the region just might avoid an explosion of violence that would set back the cause of peace for years. But this shift in the dynamics of the international community's role is anything but a reason to relax. Merely acknowledging the necessity of multilateral action is nothing like crafting an effective strategy, and even that will fail if diversions from the plan are allowed to either alter or delay its goals. The pressure to accomplish something meaningful, and to do so soon, has therefore never been heavier, especially since the apparent rejuvenation of multilateralism cannot help but raise hopes for the umpteenth time: These must not be dashed again, because the reservoir of Arab patience is as dry as that of rage is overflowing.

(MORE)

4//Asia Times Online April 12, 2002
http://www.atimes.com/front/DD12Aa03.html

EXPERTS DISMISS USE OF ARAB ARMS AGAINST ISRAEL
By Thalif Deen (Inter Press Service)

UNITED NATIONS - Pro-Western Arab states would not go to war with Israel, despite the urging of some of their citizens, because the United States has a strong military and economic hold over them, say Middle East experts and Arab commentators.

States like Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates "are simply too small or too weak to defend themselves against military threats" and therefore rely heavily on the United States for their survival, said Mouin Rabbani, director of the Palestinian-American Research Center in the West Bank town of Ramallah. "The United States provides protection to these regimes in question, and they in turn purchase billions of dollars worth of weapons they do not need and will never use," he said. "We call it recycling of petrodollars."

Over the past week or so, demonstrators have taken to the streets of Arab capitals including Cairo, Rabat and Manama to vent their anger not only at Israel for its incursion into the West Bank and Gaza but also against their own governments for not coming to the Palestinians' assistance. Arab governments have stockpiled advanced weapons systems, according to one argument common among demonstrators - now is the time to use them against Israel. "Most Arab countries are keenly aware of Israel's military prowess and of the likelihood that the United States would back Israel in a military confrontation, and are not willing to risk a direct confrontation" with Washington, said Kathleen Christison, author of "Perceptions of Palestine: Their Influence on US Middle East Policy".

Over a 10-year period ending in 2000, the United States provided US$74.2 billion in arms and military training to 11 Middle East nations: Saudi Arabia, Israel, Egypt, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Bahrain, Lebanon, Oman, Yemen and Qatar, according to official figures. Egypt receives $2.1 billion in US economic and military grants every year while Saudi Arabia's major weapons systems, including fighter planes, air-to-air missiles and main battle tanks, are all US-made and paid for in hard currency.

(SNIP)

"These Arab states are really subsidizing Western arms manufacturers and their military-industrial complexes and in return their governments can rely on protection against internal and/or external challenges," said Rabbani.

Libyan leader Muammar Gadaffi, who depends on Russia and Eastern Europe for military supplies, said last week that Israel's Arab neighbors should not only open their borders to the Palestinians but also provide some of their US-made weapons to the them. "These weapons", said Gadaffi, "are now useful only as scrap, and they should be remade into cooking pots and pans."

Christison said she liked Gadaffi's idea of recycling arms into pots and pans, adding: "This would do the entire Middle East a lot more good than helicopter gun ships and fighter jets are doing."

She disagreed, however, with Rabbani's assessment that large Arab arms purchases from the United States are specifically or primarily intended to subsidize the US weapons industry. "That is clearly one of the effects, and, from the standpoint of the US arms industry, it is one of the motivations for sales," she said. However, "most of the Arab states that purchase arms in such large quantities do indeed see the arms as some kind of guarantee of their own internal stability And it is a matter of national prestige to have the most advanced weapons possible, whether they are necessary are not," she added.

5//Far Eastern Economic Review Issue cover-dated April 18, 2002
http://www.feer.com/articles/2002/0204_18/p014region.html

WRONG TARGET

The United States has returned to Southeast Asia in search of villains but is finding itself involved in local disputes that may have little to do with international terrorism. So it's no surprise to hear critics say that the U.S. is being clumsy and misguided

By Barry Wain/SINGAPORE and KUALA LUMPUR
James Hookway in Manila contributed to this article

AMID MEDIA reports that alleged terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda network is deeply entrenched in Southeast Asia, the United States has deployed troops in the Philippines, praised Singapore and Malaysia for jailing suspects without trial and is pushing Indonesia to follow suit. But many people in the region are now saying that U.S. efforts to battle global terrorism are in danger of doing as much harm as good. The U.S. has been criticized as clumsy, misguided and falling into long-standing local disputes that have festered for years and pose little international threat.

Driven in part by its own political considerations, the U.S. has plunged into domestic politics in a way that threatens to make complex issues even messier and harder to solve. In Malaysia this translates into passive U.S. support for a harsh security law; in Indonesia it may be helping the government hound opposition politicians; and in the Philippines it has given a licence to overzealous law-enforcement officials to make false accusations.

Critics describe the U.S. approach as a witch-hunt. "The hysteria that is starting to develop is quite frightening," says Chandra Muzaffar, a Malaysian political scientist who until recently was a member of an opposition party. "You start to react to shadows."

Seven months after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, it is clear that international terrorism, including Al Qaeda, did make inroads in Muslim areas of Southeast Asia. But based on facts made public to date, it appears that no more than a few dozen militants were actively involved in plotting against the U.S. or its allies at the behest of, or in cooperation with, bin Laden. Much more often, indigenous Islamists were preoccupied in struggling--sometimes through violence--with home-grown political concerns that long predated September 11 and are likely to continue despite the U.S. crackdown on terror.

While the search for terrorists is far from over, no government in the region yet says it has discovered an Al Qaeda cell on its soil. Al Qaeda's regional activities appear to be "opportunistic," as one diplomat puts it--they visit in search of recruits, or to offer training, but apparently maintain no operational structure in the region.

(SNIP)

FINDING A 'SECOND FRONT'

Lee and some other analysts are mystified by the choice of Southeast Asia for what Bush calls a "second front" in the fight the U.S. is leading against terrorism. Some speculate about ulterior motives, suggesting that the U.S. wants to regain a strategic toehold after being evicted from Philippine bases a decade earlier. (The U.S. denies that it seeks a permanent presence in the Philippines.) Others think the U.S. is merely trying to maintain the momentum of its anti-terrorist campaign until it is ready to strike at Bush's "axis of evil"--Iran, Iraq and North Korea.

One Malaysian academic asks why the Americans aren't going after Al Qaeda in Germany in the same way, noting that some of the perpetrators of the U.S. attacks were once based in Hamburg. The consensus answer: Europe doesn't fit the demographic profile. Southeast Asia, home to 20% of the world's one billion Muslims, does. "The Americans put two and two together and get a much bigger number than four, I'm afraid," says one Western ambassador, whose government is a close ally of Washington.

A spate of media reports out of the U.S., many of them apparently relying on briefings or leaks by Bush administration officials, contributes to the impression that the Americans are barging into a region they don't fully understand. One report sourced to the Federal Bureau of Investigation claimed that Malaysia was a "primary operational launch pad" for the September 11 attacks. FBI Director Robert Mueller has since said the FBI does not think this was the case.

Furthermore, intense U.S. pressure on Indonesia to suppress Islamic militants, backed publicly by Singapore and privately by Malaysia, has caused tensions in the region.

(MORE)

6//The Japan Times Friday, April 12, 2002
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?np20020412a1.htm

MINISTERS TELL UNITED STATES TO DROP STEEL CURBS

The foreign and trade ministers on Thursday urged the United States to drop its emergency tariffs on most steel imports in separate meetings with U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick in Tokyo, declaring for the first time that Japan is ready to retaliate.

But the two sides failed to narrow their differences, as Zoellick said Washington believes its measure is consistent with World Trade Organization rules.

"On behalf of Japan, I called anew on the U.S. to withdraw its measure, as there is no evidence of an import surge," Economy, Trade and Industry Minister Takeo Hiranuma told reporters after the meeting with Zoellick.

(SNIP)

Hiranuma reiterated Tokyo's demand that if the U.S. sticks to its tariffs, Washington should compensate Japan for damage to its steel exports by lowering tariffs on other exports, but Zoellick remained noncommittal, a Japanese trade official said.

"We want a positive response on compensation right here today," Hiranuma was quoted as telling Zoellick. "If the U.S. has no intention to compensate, we cannot avoid starting preparations for suspending tariff concessions."

(SNIP)

Hiranuma demanded that Zoellick examine the compensatory issue before May 17, the deadline for Japan to notify the WTO of any retaliatory action.

Japan believes that it can meet WTO requirements for retaliation, which could include additional tariffs on imports of certain products from the U.S., against the U.S. steel import curbs.

Zoellick disagreed with Hiranuma, saying WTO members cannot take retaliatory action before a ruling of a dispute settlement panel under the world body, the official said.

Japan has never taken retaliatory action, according to the ministry.

In the meeting, Hiranuma reiterated Japan's position that the U.S. should withdraw the import curbs on steel products, claiming the action violates the WTO rules. On March 20, the U.S. introduced three-year import tariffs up to 30 percent on 14 steel products to protect domestic steel producers from a surge of steel imports.

The WTO allows member countries to impose import tariffs for up to four years to protect domestic producers from an import surge under the so-called safeguard measure.

(MORE)

7//The Guardian Thursday April 11, 2002
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,9115,682164,00.html

COMMENT: THE FAR RIGHT IS THE ENEMY
The real battle for the left must be against the far right and against racism, not between ourselves

David Blunkett

David Blunkett is home secretary.

The far right is making progress across Europe, inflaming racism and fears over asylum and illegal immigration to secure election victories against the centre left. In city elections in Rotterdam a few weeks ago, the far right polled over a third of the vote making it the largest party on the council. In Austria, Jorg Haider's party shares power, while as far afield as Australia issues of asylum and race have played a large part in the return of the right. These developments pose major challenges for all democrats. But the centre left must take this fight head on. We cannot face this challenge by ducking hard debate.

The real battle for the left must be against the far right and against racism, not between ourselves. In Britain, the British National party is preparing for next month's local elections with relish, sensing that it can exploit problems with illegal immigration and asylum pressures in ways that have been successful elsewhere. It is a vital challenge for all mainstream parties to ensure legitimate debates about asylum and immigration, race and community relations are separated from the divisive, inflammatory exploitation of fears which the fascists seize on.

I am confident this can be achieved, but only if we are honest about the scale of the threat from the BNP, which is campaigning vociferously across the country. We will not marginalise it if we pretend it does not exist or is beneath challenge. Instead, all mainstream parties must share the responsibility for ensuring the language of our political comment on race and immigration is measured and proportionate. Equally, we must all challenge the BNP when it uses false facts and figures to raise unnecessary alarm or claim that legitimate debates about citizenship and nationality somehow validate its vile racism. It is particularly incumbent on the left - having defeated the last BNP revival in 1994 - to address these issues comprehensively from a standpoint which welcomes diversity.

History teaches us that, whatever we say, racists will always distort the words of mainstream politicians to make themselves sound more respectable. That is why I reject Shahid Malik's recent assertion on these pages that the BNP twisting statements of mine is a personal indictment.

(SNIP)

Government has a key role to play - next month for the first time there will be a legal obligation on public bodies to promote race equality thanks to the Race Relations (Amendment) Act. It must also deliver asylum and immigration systems that command the confidence of the wider public to prevent the circumstances in which the BNP can prosper. But for the far right to be kept permanently at bay, all who loathe racism have to engage with the task in good faith. Squabbling among those who share the same end will only help our opponents. A solution will not be found in grandstanding or a refusal to engage in the real issues that confront us.

* * *

© 2002, Gloria R. Lalumia
insight@zianet.com

More Stuff at: http://www.zianet.com/insightanalytical

* * *