US embassy cable - 05AMMAN772

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 AMMAN 000772 
 
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 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
 
TAGS: KMDR JO 
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION ON IRAQ ELECTION AND US AND 
THE MIDDLE EAST 
 
 
                        Summary 
 
-- Lead story in all papers today, February 1, 
highlights King Abdullah's remarks during an exclusive 
interview with CNN vis--vis the Iraq election and 
regional developments.  Major stories continue to 
highlight the aftermath of the Iraq election. 
 
         Editorial Commentary on Iraq Election 
 
-- "The elections' relative success" 
 
Daily columnist Jamil Nimri writes on the back-page of 
independent, mass-appeal Arabic daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm 
(02/01):  "Abstinence on the part of the Sunnis is not 
an option now.  One must acknowledge the fact that 
history does not move backwards and that there will 
not be Sunni hegemony in the political system.  This 
past is dead and gone, and the Sunnis must join the 
rest of the components of the Iraqi people in order to 
forge a new, fair and balanced partnership.  One can 
find many faults with the elections, but the people 
went to the ballot boxes to underscore the democratic 
and peaceful option for the new Iraq.  It is the 
option of the majority of Iraqis and it will 
definitely lead to the end of the occupation.  The 
Sunnis' option to resist and thwart the political 
process puts them not only against the Americans, but 
also against two thirds of the Iraqi people.  As for 
their option to take part in the political process, 
this would put them with the majority of Iraqi people 
against occupation and for independence and 
stability." 
 
-- "The occupation scenario and the elections" 
 
Daily columnist Rakan Majali writes on the back-page 
of center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour 
(02/01):  "The U.S. administration and President 
George Bush consider the elections a success because 
they reaffirm their proposals and their justifications 
for invading Iraq..  Whatever the case may be, the 
elections comprise a domestic affair of Iraq at the 
end of the day, even if they were held under dubious 
American circumstances.  They could be the start of 
the coming together of all the political forces in 
Iraq towards restoring a free and united Iraq and 
putting an end to the occupation." 
 
-- "The Iraqi election determines Bush's standing 
domestically and abroad" 
 
Daily columnist Yaqoub Jaber writes on the op-ed page 
of center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour 
(02/01):  "The Iraqis did not vote only on the fate of 
their country, but also on the internal and external 
standing and leadership of President George Bush.. 
While Bush claimed that his reelection was an 
expression of popular support for his policy on Iraq, 
he find his political power waning if the elections 
fail to put forth a stable government in view of the 
escalation of resistance..  The elections may lead to 
the establishment of a stable government in Iraq, 
which would strengthen Bush's international standing 
and his position as the president who managed to 
promote democracy in the Middle East.  Most observers 
argue, however, that violence is going to increase 
after the elections and that resistance activities are 
going to escalate..  With or without elections, the 
United States is finding itself in trouble and wishes 
to find an honorable way out." 
 
-- "About the Iraqi election and the extensive 
participation" 
 
Daily columnist Yaser Za'atreh writes on the op-ed 
page of center-left, influential Arabic daily Al- 
Dustour (02/01):  "Looking at the issue of voting and 
its percentage, it is futile to view with confidence 
any numbers put forth by people who are completely 
biased in favor of the election process and who 
naturally would do everything they can to give these 
numbers a certificate of excellence in order to 
confirm the correctness of their political path.  The 
[election] process, from A to Z, was a process 
controlled by the occupation and those cooperating 
with it..  The voting percentage does not mean much, 
because those who boycotted did not do so except out 
of a firm conviction.  More significantly, the 
majority of those who boycotted represent a sect that 
is not only a fourth of the Iraqi people, but also a 
sect that cannot be marginalized or ignored, 
particularly when it is leading the resistance against 
the occupation; a resistance did more to force the 
hand of the occupation to undertake the elections than 
those cooperating with the occupation..  George Bush 
and the neo-conservatives must now bring in a new 
charm to their arrangement in the next stage.  The 
election, which was their promotional material for the 
past few months, is over, and now they have to rid 
themselves of the accusation of being occupiers, and 
that is at a time when their forces are still in the 
country." 
 
-- "The region after the elections" 
 
Chief Editor Taher Udwan writes on the back-page of 
independent, mass-appeal Arabic daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm 
(02/01):  "There is a prevailing illusion in the 
political arena in most of the countries of the region 
that the United States wants to strengthen the status 
quo and stability and preserve the prevalent rules of 
the political game that have existed since the rise of 
the independent Arab states.  In fact, these rules are 
being overturned, starting with the Iraqi experience, 
and the process of redrawing the geo-political map is 
now at hand following the Iraqi election." 
 
-- "Iraq: winning hearts and not the media" 
 
Columnist Rana Sabbagh writes on the op-ed page of 
independent Arabic daily Al-Ghad (02/01):  "The U.S. 
administration and Britain, along with all the 
international and most of the TV satellite channels, 
have exaggerated the `ceremony of democracy' and have 
portrayed the process as proof for all those who 
doubted that the Iraqis, followed by the Arabs, can 
pick the fruits of democracy and reform planted by the 
West.  It would have been better for Bush and his 
allies to show greater caution and not put too much 
make-up on the face of Iraq, lest expectations rise 
too high and then crash due to developments on the 
ground.  The most important thing about the next stage 
is the effort that will be exerted to achieve 
legitimate political reconciliation between the Iraqi 
parties that boycotted the election and those that 
took part in it.  It behooves the world, particularly 
the countries that opposed the war, to unite and 
cooperate in order to make sure that Iraq does not 
deviate from the track of democracy in the future and 
that the occupation forces  leave and give Iraq's 
sovereignty back to the Iraqis..  Many of us, leaders 
and people, can learn from the experience of the 
recent Iraqi election vis--vis the expansion of 
popular participation in the decision-making process 
and respect for opinions and basic human rights.  It 
is sad that, while the Iraqi people and the 
Palestinian people have exercised their right to vote 
under difficult political, social and economic 
circumstances and in the face of the guns of Israeli 
and American occupation forces, some Arab leaders 
continue the race to hold on to their seats and to 
forge the will of the people using legal loopholes and 
submission, instead of listening to the will of the 
people and the ballot box.  It is better for us that 
we take matters into our own hands when it comes to 
reform and development, instead of wasting time and 
leaving our future in the hands of a West that will, 
without a doubt, impose that future on the Arab region 
in the service of its own interests." 
 
 
    Editorial Commentary on US and the Middle East 
-- "Arabs on the hot stove" 
 
Chief Editor Usama Sharif writes on the back-page of 
center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour 
(02/01):  "This is truly the age of contradictions. 
Some of us are against the Iraq elections because they 
take place under the occupation, while others see in 
them a way out of the occupation.  Many of those who 
were offended by the Iraqi people's participation in 
the elections had kept their silence when the Iraqis 
were suffering from the abuse of their leaders.  Some 
of us are against the peace settlement with Israel, 
while others have no problem paying the price if peace 
is established.  We are against America at the popular 
level but officially we are America's closest allies. 
We are against Iran because it has designs over Iraq, 
but we support its right to develop its nuclear 
reactor because it threatens Israel.  We are against 
the west when it criticizes us, but sing the praise of 
its democracy and wish it for ourselves.  We are 
against calls for reform imposed from outside because 
they are suspicious, but we support the enemies of our 
enemies because of joint interests..  Who are we and 
what do we want? It is time to face ourselves and to 
salvage what is left of our existence, because the 
awaited awakening will not come to pass until we stop 
breaking the looking glass, which reflects our 
ugliness.  It is time to admit that the ugliness is in 
us." 
 
-- "Promoting democracy and freedom a la Condoleezza 
Rice" 
 
Daily columnist George Haddad writes on the op-ed page 
of center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour 
(02/01):  "In her first meeting with State Department 
employees, the new U.S. Secretary of State, 
Condoleezza Rice, said that `history calls upon the 
United States to implement the bold agenda that was 
proposed by President George Bush for spreading 
freedom and democracy in the world'.  Rice also 
anticipated the prosperity of democracy even in the 
infertile land of the West Bank, Iraq and 
Afghanistan..  Yes, in this overwhelmed region, there 
is some disease, ignorance and poverty and even some 
terrorism; there is also some convenient absence of 
freedom and democracy and some totalitarianism and 
horrific ill distribution of wealth.  Yet, all these 
backward and horrible phenomena are, upon reflection 
and careful consideration, the results of forcibly 
imposed situations, in which parties that benefit from 
their continuation of these phenomena take part. 
These parties are: the external party, represented by 
the plans of colonialists and the Zionist invaders, 
and the internal party, represented by the local 
pillar of political institutions and religious and 
sectarian sectors..  The new Secretary comes along 
with pre-polluted ideas that bring the joy of victory 
to no one but those responsible for Zionist lies and 
promotions, which seek to deform facts, falsify 
realities and clean the records of invaders, usurpers 
and occupiers of atrocities committed in terms of 
invasion, murder and destruction.  What is worse is 
that this Secretary is ruling on these falsifications 
armed with the ideas of promoting freedom and 
democracy.  We agree with Madame Secretary that 
`history calls upon the United States to work 
promoting freedom and democracy', provided that there 
is a realization and an awareness that usurpation and 
occupation have nothing to do with freedom and 
democracy, but are rather the opposite." 
HALE