US embassy cable - 04AMMAN5385

Disclaimer: This site has been first put up 15 years ago. Since then I would probably do a couple things differently, but because I've noticed this site had been linked from news outlets, PhD theses and peer rewieved papers and because I really hate the concept of "digital dark age" I've decided to put it back up. There's no chance it can produce any harm now.

MEDIA REACTION ON TRANSFER OF AUTHORITY TO IRAQIS

Identifier: 04AMMAN5385
Wikileaks: View 04AMMAN5385 at Wikileaks.org
Origin: Embassy Amman
Created: 2004-06-30 12:23:00
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Tags: KMDR JO
Redacted: This cable was not redacted by Wikileaks.
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 AMMAN 005385 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR NEA/ARN, NEA/PA, NEA/AIA, INR/NESA, R/MR, 
I/GNEA, B/BXN, B/BRN, NEA/PPD, NEA/IPA FOR ALTERMAN 
USAID/ANE/MEA 
LONDON FOR GOLDRICH 
PARIS FOR O'FRIEL 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
 
TAGS: KMDR JO 
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION ON TRANSFER OF AUTHORITY TO 
IRAQIS 
 
 
                        Summary 
 
-- Lead story in all papers today, June 30, highlights 
the decision to hand over Saddam Hussein and other 
members of the former Iraqi regime to the new 
government for trial.  Another lead story highlights 
King Abdullah's instructions to the government to 
undertake measures to facilitate the movement of 
Iraqis from and to Jordan. 
 
                 Editorial Commentary 
 
-- "Sovereignty on paper" 
 
Daily columnist Yaser Za'atreh writes on the op-ed 
page of center-left, influential Arabic daily Al- 
Dustour (06/30):  "It is evident that the ceremony of 
the transfer of sovereignty and authority to the 
Iraqis was part and parcel of America's participation 
in the NATO summit meeting.  Actually, the entire Iraq- 
related game seems to be closely and directly linked 
to the U.S. elections.  As far as the transfer of 
sovereignty, we, in fact, did not see anything more 
than the protocol exchange of papers between Bremer 
and Alawi, while Saddam Hussein was added to the 
process to give the impression that the handover was 
substantive.  Apart from the contract between the 
`sovereign' Iraqi government and the Americans to keep 
their forces in Iraq under the name of American-led 
multi-national forces - that does not change the 
reality of the occupation - questions related to the 
transfer of sovereignty are focused on two issues. 
The first is security and the second is the issue of 
the Iraqis' daily life.  The transfer of the security 
issue to Alawi's government did not come about as a 
result of the transfer of sovereignty, but rather 
because of Bush's desperate need to get out of the 
dilemma of American soldiers being killed on a daily 
basis in Iraq - something that is being used by his 
opponent in the elections..  As for issues related to 
the Iraqis' daily life, let us not forget the hordes 
of American consultants who will be working in Iraqi 
ministries and who will have a hand in all decisions 
related to public administration and finances.  Where 
else would all these contracts that the American 
forces arranged for its corporate companies go?  Will 
Alawi's government have the right to question or 
change these contracts?  With regard to other issues 
related to game of the sovereignty transfer, such as 
the establishment of a consultative council and a 
constitution, all this will take place according to a 
well-studied scheme whose objective is to maintain the 
parties cooperating with the occupation in the scene 
and stop any other powers who might contemplate 
kicking out or even asking the occupation or to 
leave." 
 
-- "Sam Chalabi to try Saddam" 
 
Chief editor Taher Udwan writes on the back-page of 
independent, mass-appeal Arabic daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm 
(06/30):  "Talk of the trial of the Iraqi president 
Saddam Hussein and members of his regime in an Iraqi 
court run by Salem Chalabi reminds us of trials that 
used to take place after military coups in Baghdad in 
the sixties and the seventies, where a non-elected and 
illegitimate regime would take hold of the law and the 
authority and claim it as justice and national 
interest.  Clearly, for the new rulers of Baghdad, 
Saddam's trial is a matter designed to bring 
popularity leading to legitimacy..  The new Iraqi 
government wants to conduct Saddam's trial in haste, 
because it has to take the country from occupation 
into independence and sovereignty, since law and 
justice cannot be placed in the hands of occupying 
forces, even if their name changes to multi-national 
forces.  The other dark side of Saddam's trial is that 
Salem Chalabi is to supervise the trial.  This in 
itself is an insult to Iraq and Iraqis.  Chalabi 
worked as a legal advisor for the occupation authority 
and for the former and current Iraqi government.  He 
is known as Sam Chalabi and is the nephew of Ahmad 
Chalabi.  Sam is an extreme oppositionist who served 
the CIA and who placed the so-called document for the 
transfer to democracy, which focused on ridding Iraq 
of its Arabism, establishing relations with Israel and 
eliminating Iraq's unity with what is called a 
federation..  If such people are the ones who are 
going try Saddam and leaders of the former regime, 
then who will be in charge of the trial: Iraq or 
Israel?" 
GNEHM 

Latest source of this page is cablebrowser-2, released 2011-10-04