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

280904Z Mar 03

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 HARARE 000633 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR AF/PDPA FOR DALTON, MITCHELL AND SIMS 
IRAQ PD FOR SMITH, PINESS AND ROOKARD 
NSC FOR JENDAYI FRAZER 
LONDON FOR GURNEY 
PARIS FOR NEARY 
NAIROBI FOR PFLAUMER 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: IZ PREL KPAO KMDR ZI
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION WAR WITH IRAQ; HARARE 
 
 
  ¶1.   Opinion articles carried in the March 28 edition 
      of the independent daily "The Daily News" and the 
      March 27 edition of the independent weekly "The 
      Financial Gazette" focus on the ongoing United Stated- 
      led military campaign to disarm Iraq.  Excerpts: 
 
  ¶2.   Under headline "Bush hoping for better luck with 
      Saddam than with bin Laden," Farai Makotsi dedicated 
      his weekly column "Beyond the Mountains," published on 
      page 11 in the March 28 edition of the independent 
      daily "The Daily News," to a rebuttal of the coalition 
      rationale for going the war in Iraq.  Makotsi said 
      that, apart from wanting to control Iraqi's oil 
      riches, the "war is good business for the U.S. defense 
      industry."  Excerpts: 
 
      ". . .The optimism displayed a week ago by U.S. 
      and British officials and their military 
      commanders of a `quick and successful' strike 
      against Iraq is all but subsiding.  The initial 
      shrill tone of the invasion coverage by the U.S. 
      and United Kingdom media is subduing. 
      Somberness is slowly taking over.  I'm getting a 
      distinct feeling everyone here. . .is against 
      the U.S.-UK invasion of Iraq.  I'm feeling 
      exactly the same, but not because I have a 
      special affection for the Iraqi leader.  Quite 
      to the contrary: I abhor anyone, anywhere in the 
      world who believes and acts as if he or she has 
      a God-given. . .right to rule infinitely - 
      especially one who rides roughshod over his 
      citizenry, denying them their basic human rights 
      and freedoms of expression.  Rather, I simply do 
      not buy the reasons Bush and Tony Blair, the 
      British Premier, are giving to justify an attack 
      on Iraq. 
 
      ". . .Besides oil interests, I suspect the hawks 
      in the U.S. government are going after Iraq for 
      another reason: the American economy is failing 
      to pull out of a recession.  What better way of 
      jump-starting growth than engage in war, however 
      sumptuous the reasons for doing so maybe?  War 
      is good business for the U.S. defense industry, 
      which lately has been languishing in the 
      doldrums.  There are more defense industry jobs 
      available now to keep the engine of war roaring. 
      The troops have to be fed.  Medicine supplies 
      should be in abundance.  It's more jobs for the 
      fellas back home.  Then there is Bush's single- 
      minded obsession with finishing the job his 
      father, former President George Bush, started 
      with the Gulf War 12 years ago but never fully 
      accomplished - driving Saddam out of power.  He 
      (President George W. Bush) hopes, I suppose, to 
      have more luck with Saddam than Osama bin Laden 
      -    unless, of course, the sandstorm really gets 
-    in the way." 
 
  ¶3.   Under headline "It's time to flush out the 
      Saddams of this world" the March 27 edition of the 
      independent weekly "The Financial Gazette" carried an 
      opinion piece by Sydney Masamvu - the paper's 
      Assistant Editor - on page 18 in which he hails the 
      ongoing United States-led military campaign to disarm 
      Iraq, saying, "The year 2003 should be dedicated to 
      flushing out dictators the world over - in Baghdad, 
      Havana, Jakarta, southern Africa - and send them 
      running."  Excerpts: 
 
      "Without a United Nations resolution, it 
      will remain debatable whether George W. Bush and 
      Tony Blair's war against Saddam Hussein was the 
      right option or not.  Indeed, it could be argued 
      that Bush and Blair are probably guilty of 
      attempting to subject the U.N. system to the 
      same dictatorial tendencies they accuse Saddam 
      of practicing in Iraq.  But. the reality is 
      that only resolute action, fire and force if 
      need be, is the way to get any dictator to 
      change tack. 
 
      "I personally wish the kind of forthrightness, 
      frankness and above all decisiveness exhibited 
      by Bush in his handling of Saddam would catch up 
      with our leaders here in Africa, especially 
      those spearheading the New Partnership for 
      African Development (NEPAD).  Such a determined 
      stance against tyranny would drive the many tin- 
      pot dictators flourishing in many an African 
      country out of the continent.  The year 2003 
      should be dedicated to flushing out dictators 
      the world over - in Baghdad, Havana, Jakarta, 
      southern Africa - and send them running for dear 
      life.  Progressive forces must emulate the 
      example set by the Americans and with all in 
      their power confront the dictators in their 
      corner of the world for, Anglo/American handling 
      of Saddam has shown, quiet diplomacy is a pipe 
      dream." 
 
      ¶4.  Comment:  Masamvu's piece is a good 
      illustration of one current of opinion share by 
      some Zimbabweans opposed to the Mugabe 
      government.  That opinion holds that Saddam and 
      Mugabe are roughly equivalent and should be 
      treated with equivalent roughness.  End comment. 
 
SULLIVAN