US embassy cable - 03AMMAN876

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 AMMAN 000876 
 
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 
USCINCCENT//CCPA, USCENTCOM REAR MACDILL AFB FL 
STATE PASS TO AID 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
 
TAGS: KMDR JO 
SUBJECT: SPECIAL MEDIA REACTION ON SECRETARY POWELL'S 
U.N. AND SENATE SPEECHES 
 
                        Summary 
 
-- Lead stories in all papers published on February 7 
highlight Secretary Powell's remarks to the Senate 
Foreign Relations Committee regarding the possibility 
of war in Iraq, and contrast those remarks negatively 
with his earlier presentation before the UN Security 
Council.  Articles focus on the Secretary's remarks, 
as quoted in wire service reports, that success in 
overthrowing Saddam Hussein "could fundamentally 
reshape that region in a powerful and positive way 
that will enhance U.S. interests" and that, in the 
event of such an occurrence, the United States would 
be "able to achieve progress on Middle East peace". 
Most commentaries argue that, at the United Nations, 
the Secretary tried to portray the United States as 
the "savior" of the Iraqi people and Iraqi human 
rights and democracy, while, at the Senate, the 
Secretary spelled out the "real reasons" behind the 
 
SIPDIS 
U.S. war on Iraq, namely to "reshape the region" in a 
manner that "will enhance U.S. interests". 
 
                 Editorial Commentary 
 
-- "The objective of the aggression by Powell's own 
admission: fundamental reshaping and Arab surrender" 
 
Columnist George Haddad writes on the op-ed page of 
center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour 
(02/08):  "It is normal for Secretary Powell's speech 
to the United Nations and to the world to be different 
from his speech to the U.S. Senate.  At the United 
Nations, Powell still needs, in order to promote his 
justifications and pretexts, the spice of the media 
and the skill of fabrication and falsification.  In 
Congress, however, Powell has to give up the spice and 
the skill, and must resort to frankness and truth to 
explain the real reason for launching the aggression 
on Iraq.  At the Security Council, Powell was 
concerned for the safety of humanity and wanted to 
salvage it from terrorism.  In other words, he wore 
the mask of savior who volunteers to salvage the 
people of the world from Iraqi terrorism.  In 
Congress, on the other hand, Powell had to `spit it 
out' and confess that ousting Saddam Hussein could 
reshape the Middle East in a manner that strengthens 
the interests of the United States and help end the 
Arab-Israeli conflict." 
 
-- "Powell reveals the real objectives of the American 
scheme" 
 
Columnist Mazen Saket writes on the op-ed page of 
center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour 
(02/08):  "Powell, after his speech at the Security 
Council, where he tried to push the international 
community to give the green light for an American 
aggression against Iraq in the name of disarmament and 
Iraq's non-compliance on inspections, went back to the 
Senate Foreign Relations Committee to present the real 
American motives and objectives for launching the war 
and aggression on Iraq.  He said that the war will 
fundamentally reshape the region in a positive manner 
that will strengthen U.S. interests and will achieve 
progress towards `peace' in the Middle East.  After 
this clarification, every other pronounced 
justification about Iraq's lack of cooperation, 
Security Council resolutions, Iraqi democracy, and the 
occupation of Kuwait becomes null and void.  The issue 
is clear: an American declaration to place the entire 
region under direct hegemony and control and reshaping 
it by way of a 21st century-style Sikes-Picot." 
 
-- "Reshaping the Middle East" 
 
Columnist Kamal Rasheed writes on the op-ed page of 
center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour 
(02/09):  "With Powell's remarks, the hidden agenda is 
now exposed and the objective of all this military 
campaign against the Middle East is clear.  The 
remarks mean that exiting countries will fall and be 
replaced, and may be divided up and distributed or 
merged with others.  Yes, it is a process of exploding 
the existing political map of the region.  The 
standard of this reshaping will not consider friends 
or enemies, only American interests in the region, the 
first of which is the State of Israel, its survival, 
superiority, security and hegemony.  The countries 
threatened by this are all the Arab and Muslim 
countries, friends or not of the United States.  No 
country will be spared, big or small.  They will all 
face the American hammer." 
 
-- "The selected slavery" 
 
Columnist Kathem Miqdadi writes on the independent, 
mass-appeal Arabic daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm (02/09): 
"Colin Powell said it, bluntly and clearly, before 
Congress, that overthrowing the regime of Saddam 
Hussein will `reshape" the Middle East to become more 
responsive to U.S. interests.  Not a single Arab 
official remarked on these dangerous remarks.  Please 
note that the term `reshape' is dangerous and very 
fluid.  It includes the reshaping of countries, 
governments, organizations, property, agreements, 
regimes and policies.  Before this scary reality and 
before this new American act of arrogance, Arabs 
continue to look for a date for their summit meeting." 
BERRY