US embassy cable - 05BAGHDAD2889

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BAGHDAD 002889 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR INR/R/MR, NEA/PPD, NEA/PPA, NEA/AGS, INR/IZ, 
INR/P 
E.0. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OPRC, KMDR, KPAO, IZ, Media Reaction 
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: IRAQ, TERROR, EGYPTIAN AMBASSADOR; 
BAGHDAD 
 
1. SUMMARY: The major themes in the daily newspapers on 
July 10 were Talabani's and Al-Jafari's condolences to the 
Egyptian President for the assassination of the Ambassador 
in Baghdad, Al-Jafari's expected visit to Tehran, the 
constitutional committee's preparations for drafting the 
constitution, and the developments of the security 
situation. END SUMMARY. 
 
----------------- 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
----------------- 
 
A. "After the killing of the Egyptian ambassador, the 
'resistance' leaves the occupiers alone while killing those 
who opposed the occupation" (Al-Adala, 7/10) 
B. "Voices of the moon" (Asharq Al-Awsat, 7/10) 
 
---------------------- 
SELECTED COMMENTARIES 
---------------------- 
A. "After the killing of the Egyptian ambassador, the 
'resistance' leaves the occupiers alone while killing those 
who opposed the occupation" (Al-Adala, 7/10) 
 
Al-Adala (affiliated with SCIRI, pro-coalition) published a 
last-page editorial by Muhammad Al-Abdullah about the 
killing of the Egyptian ambassador in Iraq: 
 
"The abduction of the Egyptian ambassador, Ihab Al-Sherif, 
lasted for less than a week before the terrorists decided 
to murder him. In addition, the terrorists attempted to 
kill the ambassadors of Bahrain and Pakistan. Before these 
operations occurred, these same terrorists killed thousands 
of innocent Iraqis. We have stated previously that the 
operations of Al-Qaeda, Al-Zarqawi, and Saddam's loyalists 
represent the most ruthless degree of terror. Despite these 
groups' claims, these are not 'resistance' operations 
because these groups do not have an overall strategy for 
resisting the occupation. Their only apparent objective is 
to resist the changes that are occurring in the new Iraq. 
 
The men responsible for these terrible crimes are not 
merely thieves or gangsters. They are terrorists who have 
increased the severity of their crimes after discovering 
that the Arab regimes preferred to keep silent rather than 
openly condemning these crimes. These terrorists regarded 
the Arab regimes' silence as tacit encouragement to 
continue conducting their terrorist operations that kill 
innocent Iraqis. In fact, these terrorist groups have had 
both direct and indirect relationships with these Arab 
regimes. However, once these regimes decided to normalize 
their relationships with Iraq by sending ambassadors or 
envoys to Baghdad, the terrorist groups realized that Iraq 
had achieved success. As a result, these terrorist groups 
will become isolated as they lose the logistical support 
they were receiving from these Arab regimes. The terrorist 
groups will be unable to accept this fact because their 
strategy of provoking sectarian strife will fail. 
 
In response to Egypt sending its ambassador to Iraq, the 
terrorists killed him. The actions of the terrorists have 
become unpredictable.  They released the Australian 
hostage, whose country's troops were occupying Iraq, while 
killing the Egyptian Ambassador, whose country was opposed 
to the occupation. Therefore, it is clear that the 
terrorists' objective is not aimed at resisting the 
occupation. Rather, their strategy is to resist all Iraqis 
who are building a new country. The terrorists regarded the 
presence of an Egyptian ambassador as evidence that Egypt 
approves of and supports the new Iraqi project. For this 
reason, the terrorists killed the Egyptian ambassador in 
order to convey a message of war to Egypt, Bahrain, 
Pakistan and other countries considering sending 
ambassadors to Iraq. 
 
Although the terrorists have killed thousands of Iraqis, 
the Iraqi people are insistent upon making this project 
succeed. The Iraqi people will crush Al-Zarqawi, Saddam 
loyalists, and anyone else who wants to damage Iraq. Egypt, 
Bahrain, and other countries must be courageous and make 
the right decision in continuing to restore their 
relationships with Iraq. In the wake of the killing of the 
Egyptian ambassador, do the Arabs finally realize that what 
is happening in Iraq is not resistance but terror? These 
terrorist operations in Iraq are targeting the new 
democratic project, not the occupation. Can the Arabs see 
this now or do they need more evidence?" 
 
B. "Voices of the moon" (Asharq Al-Awsat, 7/10) 
Asharq Al-Awsat (independent, non-biased, London-based) 
published a last-page editorial by Sameer Attalla about the 
killing of the Egyptian ambassador in Iraq: 
"Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi's followers assassinated the Egyptian 
ambassador in Iraq while their brothers were assassinating 
bus riders in London. For this reason, the kidnapped 
diplomat died lonely and without much outrage expressed by 
the public. One day after the Egyptian ambassador's 
assassination, he was shown blindfolded in a photo but had 
not yet been decapitated. Unfortunately, the pan-Arab media 
outlets decapitated what was left of the story. These 
networks stated that Al-Zarqawi was not responsible for the 
crime because Egypt sent an ambassador to Iraq and restored 
its relationship with a government that was not recognized 
by Al-Zarqawi. The pan-Arab outlets further stated that the 
U.S. asked Egypt to send its ambassador to Baghdad. 
 
Providing justification for why this crime was committed is 
worse than committing the crime itself. We understand that 
there are no formal international statutes or laws that 
forbid killers from blowing up buses and trains. There are, 
however, regulations that protect the lives of diplomats. 
Indeed, it seems as though Al-Zarqawi is the figure who 
will decide the future of a country with a population of 
over 70 million. He will decide which countries Egypt can 
have relationships with and which countries it should 
boycott diplomatically. 
 
These pan-Arab media outlets and their hero Al-Zarqawi do 
not understand that diplomatic relationships can be also 
formed with countries, not just with the governing regimes. 
Such relationships are organized by common interests and 
customs, not by butchers and decapitated heads shown on 
television. These media outlets must realize that 
provocation is dangerous because those who provoke such 
operations might have sons or daughters that climb aboard a 
bus or join the diplomatic corps. Ambassadors should not be 
killed because of their government's policies. This deed is 
worse than the law of the jungle itself. Although we are 
moving quickly towards the Dark Age, it is too premature 
for Al-Zarqawi to organize the Arab world's diplomatic 
representation. It is better for pan-Arab journalists to 
occupy themselves with praising Al-Zarqawi while allowing 
Egypt, Bahrain, and other countries to manage their own 
diplomatic affairs." 
 
SATTERFIELD