US embassy cable - 03OTTAWA610

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 OTTAWA 000610 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR WHA/CAN, WHA/PDA 
WHITE HOUSE PASS NSC/WEUROPE 
 
E.O. 12958:  N/A 
TAGS: KPAO, KMDR, OIIP, OPRC, CA, TFUS01, TFUS02, TFUS03 
SUBJECT:  MEDIA REACTION: IRAQ 
 
 
IRAQ 
1.   "A volley of propaganda" 
Contributing foreign editor Eric Margolis wrote in the 
conservative tabloid Ottawa Sun (3/3): "...[W]hat I 
dislike even more than Saddam's nasty regime are 
government lies and propaganda. Since 9/11, Americans 
have been subjected to the most intense propaganda 
campaign from their government since World War I. Much 
of the mainstream U.S. media have been intimidated 
by the Bush administration into unquestioningly 
amplifying its party line. Or, in the worst tradition 
of yellow, jingoist journalism, they act as 
cheerleaders for war.... The American public, often 
wobbly about geography, history and international 
affairs, has been alternatively terrified and enraged 
by bare-faced lies that Iraq was about to attack 
America with nuclear weapons or germs, and was a secret 
ally of al-Qaida. A shocking two-thirds of Americans 
mistakenly believe Iraq staged the 9/11 attacks.... 
It's frightening to see Bush claim with a straight face 
his war against Iraq will bring democracy and peace to 
the Mideast, and save Iraqis from repression. Why 
didn't he begin by saving Palestinians from the 
repression by his alter-ego, Israeli Prime Minister 
Ariel Sharon? If Bush really cared about Mideast 
democracy, he's had two years to do something about 
U.S.-sponsored dictatorships like Egypt and Pakistan, 
or medieval autocracies such as Morocco, Jordan, Saudi 
Arabia and America's Gulf protectorates. When Bush says 
he will bring democracy to benighted Iraqis, what he 
really means is U.S. rule. In Bush-speak, 'democracy' 
has been perverted to mean U.S. imperial hegemony.... 
Many Americans simply don't understand their leadership 
is about to plunge the nation into an open-ended, 
dangerous colonial war. All the propaganda about 
democracy, human rights and regional stability is the 
same kind of double-talk used by the 19th century 
British and French imperialists who claimed they were 
grabbing Africa and Asia to bring the benefits of 
Christian civilization to the heathens.... Misery loves 
company. An American-occupied Iraq looks destined to 
join the Israeli-occupied West Bank and Gaza as another 
human, political and moral disaster for all concerned." 
 
2.   "Remaking the Arab world" 
The conservative National Post editorialized (3/1): "In 
a speech to the American Enterprise Institute on 
Wednesday, U.S. President George W. Bush made the case 
for war in terms that transcend weapons of mass 
destruction and UN resolutions.... We hope the world 
pays heed to Mr. Bush's message. While disarming Iraq, 
ending the country's sponsorship of terrorism and 
liberating Saddam Hussein's subjects are all war-worthy 
goals, the greatest dividend to be hoped for in the 
long run is the transformation of the Arab 
Middle East.... In his speech on Wednesday, Mr. Bush 
declared that 'we will remain in Iraq as long as 
necessary,' and compared the coming reconstruction 
project with the rebuilding of Japan and Germany six 
decades ago.... The historical comparison is apt, and 
we hope Mr. Bush follows through on these words. 
Through its sustained presence in Iraq, the United 
States will have a rare opportunity to transform the 
Arab Middle East. It would be a tragedy if the 
President turned his back on this crucial enterprise 
once the immediate threat posed by Saddam is 
extinguished." 
 
3.   "Peace can still prevail" 
The liberal Toronto Star opined (3/3): "...American 
pressure has stiffened the Security Council, which is 
forcing Saddam - at last - to disarm. But Bush is now 
perversely undermining the U.N. by making 'regime 
change' in Baghdad a requirement, in addition to 
disarmament.... Democrats in Congress may be too timid 
to challenge Bush. But polls suggest a fast-growing 
public preference in America for working within the 
U.N. to exhaust peaceful options. Enfeebled by years of 
sanctions, Iraq presents no immediate threat. 
The same can't be said of a Security Council at war 
with itself. Making specific demands of Saddam, instead 
of reiterating the Bush mantra that 
'Iraq must disarm,' would silence those who contend 
that Bush can never be satisfied. Saddam's obduracy is 
infuriating. And he is dangerous.... Still, Saddam has 
blinked. That suggests there's a chance he can be 
disarmed peacefully. That would vindicate Bush. 
Reaffirm American leadership. Enhance U.S. prestige. 
And strengthen the United Nations. All without firing a 
shot. It's worth a try." 
 
CELLUCCI