US embassy cable - 03OTTAWA2389

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 OTTAWA 002389 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR WHA/CAN, WHA/PDA 
WHITE HOUSE PASS NSC/WEUROPE, NSC/WHA 
 
E.O. 12958:  N/A 
TAGS: KPAO, KMDR, OIIP, OPRC, CA, TFUS01, TFUS02, TFUS03 
SUBJECT:  MEDIA REACTION: IRAQ; AFRICA; LIBYA; MIDDLE 
EAST 
 
IRAQ 
1.   "Going the distance" 
Under the sub-heading, "Acts of sabotage must not 
disrupt the rebuilding of Iraq," the nationalist Ottawa 
Citizen   opined (8/19): "...Unquestionably, the 
escalating attacks against coalition soldiers, 
embassies and, most recently, utilities - a pipeline 
supplying Baghdad with water was blown up and an oil 
pipeline set on fire over the weekend - threaten 
American plans for a stable Iraq. Yet it is an 
exaggeration to think the violence means the U.S.-led 
effort is faltering. Mr. Bush anticipated a long and 
hard war.... The challenge for the coalition is to 
create conditions that will allow Iraqis to feel 
secure. Acts of sabotage and random violence are 
demoralizing, inducing the kind of uncertainty that 
tempts people to support a return to dictatorship, so 
desperate are they for stability and order. This is 
what the saboteurs and assassins seek to accomplish: 
Undermine Iraqis' confidence in the ability of the U.S. 
and its partners to bring order and freedom to the 
country.... The West needs to contribute more 
(police, administrators, engineers and doctors are also 
badly needed) to help Iraq's recovery. If not, the 
effort to reform Iraq, spark democratization in the 
Arab world, and ultimately win the war on terrorism 
will be jeopardized." 
 
2.   "Mideast carnage tests our resolve" 
The liberal Toronto Star editorialized (8/20): "The 
limits of American power were on raw display yesterday 
in the smoking rubble of the United Nations 
headquarters in Iraq, and in the mangled wreckage of a 
bus in Jerusalem. After easily shattering Saddam 
Hussein's regime, U.S. President George Bush 
is finding it hard to win the peace in Iraq and restore 
order. And his drive for Mideast peace is faltering. 
The heavy-handed American occupation in Iraq is fast 
becoming the tragic shambles the critics predicted.... 
Whatever the rights or wrongs of American policy in 
Iraq, the U.N. is there to restore 
civilian rule after Saddam's criminal rule, and to 
rebuild.... The terrorists' crimes must reinforce our 
resolve to rebuild a democratic Iraq and a peaceful 
region. In Iraq, Bush should recognize that American 
military rule cannot stretch out indefinitely. He 
should begin to extricate the U.S. by seeking a new 
Security Council resolution putting the U.N. in charge 
of a truly empowered Iraqi interim regime, replacing 
the Pentagon's fumbling provisional authority. The 
U.S./British occupation must give way to a broader 
international peacekeeping and rebuilding effort, 
underwritten by U.S. military muscle but drawing on 
Turkey, India, France and others.... There is no 
accommodating terror. It marches to a perverse logic 
all its own. But offering Iraqis a speedier return to 
self-rule and normalcy, and offering Palestinians and 
Israelis hope, are the surest ways to subvert terror's 
murderous appeal." 
 
AFRICA 
3.   "Idi Amin's end" 
The leading Globe and Mail opined (8/20): "It's a 
modern image so commonplace that it verges on the 
clich: A deposed dictator, driven from his country by 
a popular uprising or international diplomacy, relaxes 
with his retinue in a palatial mansion in some 
accommodating country, shopping in the local market and 
occasionally giving interviews. It seems laughable, and 
it is. But it is also an outrage.... Death should never 
be celebrated, but Ugandans must feel a certain comfort 
at the passing of the man who tormented them for eight 
long years.... There is no conclusive tally of the 
deaths Idi Amin caused, but it is estimated at between 
200,000 and 500,000.... At no 
time during those 24 years of luxurious exile did 
anyone try to interrupt his country-club lifestyle and 
hold him to account for his vicious rule or genocidal 
tendencies, and that is a slap in the face to the 
hundreds of thousands he oppressed." 
 
LIBYA 
4.   "Libya pays for terror" 
The liberal Toronto Star editorialized (8/19): "It has 
taken 15 years, but Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's 
pariah regime is finally being forced to shell out some 
compensation for bombing a Pan Am airliner over 
Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988, killing 270 people.... 
Over the years, U.N. sanctions and isolation have cost 
Libya a breathtaking $50 billion in lost oil sales and 
other costs. That loss will never be recovered. The 
U.N. squeezed Libya hard in 1992. Diplomatic ties were 
downgraded. An air travel and arms blockade were 
imposed. Sales of machinery to Libya's oil industry 
were stopped. And Libyan assets were frozen. This 
resolve forced Gadhafi to surrender al-Megrahi for 
trial. The Security Council deserves credit for keeping 
the pressure on. Gadhafi's offer of compensation now 
has France pressing for hefty reparations in the 
similar 1989 mid-air bombing by Libyans of a French 
aircraft with 170 aboard. Payments cannot bring back 
the victims. But Gadhafi's regime has at least been 
held to account for a hideous crime. And that is some 
comfort. It puts others on notice that the world is 
resolved to exact a price from those who practise 
terror." 
 
MIDDLE EAST 
5.   "Bombings rattle Bush's Middle East strategy" 
Washington correspondent Barry McKenna offered the 
following analysis in the leading Globe and Mail 
(8/20): "...[Y]esterday's bombings, which killed at 
least 40 people and injured more than 100, have raised 
troubling new questions about the administration's 
Middle East strategy, particularly in Iraq.... So far, 
the U.S. people have remained strongly supportive of 
U.S. polices. Polls show that Americans overwhelmingly 
support the Bush administration's policies in Iraq and 
in the war on terrorism, in spite of considerable 
skepticism elsewhere in the world. But the danger of 
support eroding at home increases if the situation in 
the Middle East continues to deteriorate. It's becoming 
increasingly clear to many analysts that Mr. 
Bush's ambitious Middle East goals won't come easily." 
 
6.   "Another reason to build the fence" 
Under the sub-heading, "Separating Israel from the West 
Bank will help prevent attacks such as yesterday's bus 
bombing," the conservative National 
Post commented (8/20): "...The real reason Israel is 
building the fence is to prevent acts of terrorism - 
such as yesterday's brutal suicide-bomb attack on a 
Jerusalem bus. Every nation in the world has the right 
- and, in fact, duty - to protect its citizens, and 
Israel is correctly asserting that right.... Almost all 
of the attacks have originated in the West Bank - none 
from Gaza, though its residents bristle equally at the 
Israeli presence. The reason is simple: Unlike the West 
Bank, Gaza is already separated from Israel proper by a 
fence. This fact provides grounds for optimism that the 
new fence, once complete, may cut terrorism 
dramatically. This helps explain why Palestinian 
supporters condemn the fence. Many falsely believe that 
terrorism - or the threat thereof - will force Israel 
to make dramatic concessions to the Palestinians, and 
perhaps might even lead to the 
destruction of Israel entirely. And so they naturally 
oppose any security measure that will impede the 
violence. It is only because expressing support 
for terrorism openly would be outr that fence 
opponents instead give us cynical claims about 
'apartheid.' All this said, Israel should proceed 
cautiously with the fence.... As far as is consistent 
with Israel's security needs, Mr. Sharon must also 
ensure the security fence does not penetrate unduly 
into Palestinian areas in a manner that suggests a land 
grab.... Moreover, wherever the fence is ultimately 
located, Mr. Sharon must ensure that the Palestinians 
whose lands lie in its path are treated fairly - and, 
where necessary, compensated financially for their 
hardship.... Ultimately, the fence will not bring 
peace: That won't come until Palestinians - and Arabs 
generally - accept the existence of a Jewish state in 
their midst. But the fence will at least reduce the 
human toll wrought by Palestinian extremism. In the 
meantime, it is not Israel's security measures that 
should be the target of condemnation, but the terrorism 
that necessitates them." 
 
CELLUCCI