This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 AMMAN 000810 
 
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 MIDDLE 
EAST 
 
 
                        Summary 
 
-- Lead stories today, February 2, highlight the 
Israeli Palestinian conflict and domestic political 
issues.  Although reporting on the aftermath of the 
Iraq election seems to have moved to the inside pages 
of all papers, editorial commentary on the election 
continues and has broadened to encompass the state of 
democracy in the Arab world. 
 
                 Editorial Commentary 
 
-- "The road to Iraq's future" 
 
Columnist Mohammad Abu Rumman writes on the op-ed page 
of independent Arabic daily Al-Ghad (02/02):  "In 
light of the Iraq election and the nature of the 
present formula, we would better to leave behind our 
previous line of thinking and read the scene with more 
objective analysis.  The reading I refer to starts 
with the following questions: why did the various 
Iraqi sects, with the exception of the Sunnis, take 
part in the elections and accept democracy under 
American occupation?  Will the current path of the 
resistance lead to the liberation of Iraq and (serve) 
its national interests?  I see no difference among the 
Iraqis of the various sects in terms of defining the 
resistance as a national and religious duty and the 
occupation as a despicable action.  Yet there are 
calculations behind the political conduct of the Kurds 
and Shiites that push them towards appeasing and 
supporting the occupation and widening the gap between 
them and the Sunnis.  The Shiites have suffered from 
repression and oppression, their religious and 
political freedoms were banned, and the `Saddam era' 
committed major massacres and killings against them.. 
We, the Arabs of neighboring countries, created a 
feeling of political, religious and social alienation 
among the Iraqi Shiites.  This is because Arabs 
supported Saddam on the pretext of halting the Iranian 
revolution while failing to say one word against the 
massacres and crimes that were being committed against 
these sects..  When the Iraqi resistance began it was 
not accompanied by a political agenda that would 
distance Sunnis as a whole from the events of the 
previous era.  On the contrary, the resistance was 
defined as a resistance linking Sunnis with the Baath 
party and remnants of the former regime..  Meanwhile, 
the American occupation appealed to the Shiites, 
stressing to them that the outcome of the Iraqi 
political process would reformat the political arena 
in a manner that guarantees the rule of the majority, 
namely the Shiites..  The western and American media 
at the beginning of the occupation tended to hold the 
Sunnis responsible for the heritage of the `Saddam 
era', although the Sunnis were as much victims as the 
other sects.  Iraq, in reality, was not ruled by the 
Sunnis, but by a class of corrupt officials, 
dictators, and a repressive police system. Like it or 
not, the Iraqi elections actually succeeded, and 
sooner or later the American occupation is on its way 
out.  As for the armed Iraqi resistance, if it is not 
accompanied by a sound political agenda that goes 
beyond Zarqawi and his group and that understands the 
previous era and the aspirations of the other sects, 
it will not lead to liberation but rather to civil 
war.  As much as we are proud of the national 
resistance, the priority of the Sunnis today must 
shift to the political arena." 
 
-- "Iraq:  what next?" 
 
Former Cabinet Minister Mohammad Halaiqah writes on 
the back-page of independent Arabic daily Al-Ghad 
(02/02):  "We are trying to be optimistic about what 
is going on in Iraq in terms of a semi-democracy that 
is taking place, just as we were previously optimistic 
about the Palestinian elections, which were close to 
being an advanced form of democracy.  The Palestinian 
and Iraqi people are both under occupation but the 
difference between them is striking.  One is trying to 
get rid of the occupation and to establish an 
independent state, and the other is seeking the help 
of the occupation to rebuild its institutions and 
regain control of the country's capabilities.  We are 
trying to be optimistic despite the small room that 
exists for such optimism, and that is because we 
believe in the Iraqi people." 
 
-- "The problem is with us" 
Daily columnist Jamil Nimri writes on the back-page of 
independent, mass-appeal Arabic daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm 
(02/02):  "The sad outcome that we see in the reality 
on the ground is that the most democratic elections 
these days have taken place under two occupations: the 
American occupation in Iraq and the Israeli occupation 
in Palestine; that is in the absence of a local 
authority that controls the decision!" 
 
-- "One fact and deceiving details" 
 
Daily columnist Rakan Majali writes on the back-page 
of center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour 
(02/02):  "When talking about the Iraq election under 
occupation, we forget the basic fact, namely that the 
military occupation of any country is the highest form 
of aggression and an expression of revenge, murder and 
destruction..  The Iraqi people know that they have 
been subject to a vicious colonial conspiracy and the 
elections are not going to derail their attention from 
the resistance of injustice and conspiracy..  Any 
claims that the United States is keen to exercise 
democracy are false claims, because America uses 
slogans of freedom to strike against freedom, nullify 
sovereignty and cancel independence." 
 
-- "If I had the chance, I would visit Auschwitz" 
 
Daily columnist Bater Wardam writes on the op-ed page 
of center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour 
(02/02):  "I am personally and categorically convinced 
about rejecting normalization with Israel.  I have 
never visited the Zionist state.  I have never been in 
direct contact with Israelis in a political or media 
dialogue and I have never taken part in any research 
project with members of an Israeli organization.  I 
have never been in a place with any Israelis except in 
some European airports and international conventions. 
I will maintain this stand until Israel restores the 
rights of the Palestinian people, until a peace 
agreement is reached, until the independent 
Palestinian state is established, and until Israeli 
crimes against the Palestinian people are stopped. 
Having said that, I stick to making a differentiation 
between Jews and Israelis, and I find no problem with 
dealing with non-Zionist and non-Israeli Jews.. 
European Jews who fell victim to the Nazis in the 
forties suffered a tremendous human slaughter, 
something never seen in history except in the 
crusaders slaughter of Muslims in the middle ages, the 
Turks slaughter of the Armenians, the Israeli 
slaughter of the Palestinians, the Serbs slaughter of 
the Bosnians, the Russians slaughter of the Chechens, 
and the American slaughters against Japan, Vietnam and 
Iraq.  These are ugly records in the human history of 
mass annihilation and racial extermination.  One 
cannot deal with them selectively.  We cannot reject 
the slaughters committed against Muslims but ignore 
the ones committed against peaceful Jews and 
Armenians..  It is clear that the Zionists learned 
nothing from the Holocaust.  They continue to exercise 
the same Nazi measures against the Palestinians and 
pile up nuclear weapons in the region in preparation 
for a holocaust that wipes away everything. 
Meanwhile, the Europeans celebrate getting rid of the 
mark of the holocaust, since they resolved their 
problem by creating a huge problem in the heart of the 
Arab world and moving the holocaust into our homes and 
our lands.  I would go to Auschwitz if I had the 
chance.  After all, the victims of the holocaust are 
victims of the Zionist movement at the end of the day. 
It would be better for Muslims to be part of rejecting 
racism in all its forms and to distinguish between the 
victims of the holocaust on one hand and the Zionists 
and Israelis on the other hand, because merging the 
last two would be serving exactly what Israel and the 
Zionist movement want.  That is why visiting Auschwitz 
by Muslims and Arabs would a type of fighting 
normalization with Israel and the Zionists." 
HALE