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

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 AMMAN 004590 
 
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 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
 
TAGS: KMDR JO
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION ON IRAQ 
 
                        Summary 
 
-- Lead stories in all papers today, July 24, carry 
reports about the U.S. Department of Defense's 
confirmation of the death of Uday and Qusay, Saddam 
Hussein's sons.  Major editorial commentaries 
characterized the deaths as "killings" by U.S. forces 
and offered praise for the resistance of the two sons, 
irrespective of their acknowledged horrible treatment 
of their fellow Iraqis when in power. 
 
                 Editorial Commentary 
 
-- "Reconciliation not blood" 
 
Centrist, influential among the elite English daily 
Jordan Times (07/24) editorializes:  "The killing of 
Saddam Hussein's two sons Uday and Qusay at the hands 
of U.S. soldiers might be an important development, 
but it certainly is nothing to brag about.  True, the 
two Iraqis were on the `most wanted list' and their 
elimination may have brought the United States closer 
to its declared objective of canceling any remnants of 
the former Baath regime, but ending their lives will 
not, by itself, restore law and order to Iraq. 
Besides, summary executions and political killings 
represent the way and style of governance of the old 
Iraqi regime and must not be the hallmark of the new 
Iraqi order.  Saddam's sons should have been brought 
to justice for their terrible record of violence, 
atrocities and repression against their people. 
Arresting them would have served the interests of Iraq 
much more than taking away their lives..  Uday and 
Qusay's killing will not change the picture unless the 
more basic issues and challenges are dealt with 
appropriately." 
 
-- "The killing of the President's sons" 
 
Daily columnist Jamil Nimri writes on the back-page of 
independent, mass-appeal Arabic daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm 
(07/24):  "I thought it was completely inappropriate 
for official statements to be issued from capitals 
such as Washington, London and Tehran expressing 
`reassurance' at the news of killing the sons of the 
former Iraqi President.  Every killing incident is a 
painful and tragic incident and must not be, 
officially, expressed in terms of reassurance.  I can 
understand that thousands of Iraqis wished to have the 
most horrible act of vengeance against Uday for 
instance because of his actions, but states apprehend 
people to achieve justice and do not rejoice at 
killings..  The killing of the President's sons and 
grandson is received with a mixture of vague and 
contradictory feelings..  In a regime of tyranny where 
one official kisses up to those above and terrorizes 
those below him, it is difficult to anticipate how 
these people will behave at the end.  There are those 
who, when in their position of power and authority, 
are brutal and murderous, but turn into cowards and 
scoundrels when their own life is at stake.  This is 
what happened to the tens of leaders in Iraq, but it 
is quite different with the President and his sons. 
We have no idea what Saddam's end will be like, but we 
do know that his sons were not finished off in a scene 
of pity and contempt.  They did not allow themselves 
to be humiliated, like running out of Iraq, getting 
caught and handcuffed by the coalition forces, or even 
surrendering..  It is a tragic existence.  We 
reiterate our rejection of this type of character in 
the ruling position [harsh and brutal], but we take 
off our hats and bow in silence when a person who is a 
fighter dies without bargaining or humiliation." 
 
-- "When the President falls" 
 
Chief Editor Taher Udwan writes on the back-page of 
independent, mass-appeal Arabic daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm 
(07/24):  "The end of Uday and Qusay is in line with 
their personal nature and their position in authority. 
They fought the American occupation forces 
courageously and did not surrender as others who have 
shared Saddam's power for 34 years did.  And if there 
is a link between them and resistance operations, then 
the way they were killed will make them martyrs in the 
eyes of their followers from the resistance..  The 
phenomenon of the flourishing hypocrisy among Saddam's 
supporters that followed his downfall stresses not 
only that the dictatorship is corrupt, but also that 
it is capable of creating an army of hypocrites who 
would abandon the leader the minute he falls and would 
set on the humiliating path of changing allegiances 
and trying to win the new masters.  It is a valuable 
lesson from third world countries that have had enough 
of torture and humiliation from dictatorships and the 
absence of democracy.  It is also a valuable lesson 
for the dictator who finishes off his countrymen, 
excludes them from authority and marginalizes the 
people, and then when the tables are turned, there is 
no one around him." 
 
-- "Why assassinate and not put on trial?" 
 
Columnist Ibrahim Absi writes on the op-ed page of 
center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustour 
(07/24):  "The assassination of Uday and Qusay at the 
hands of the American forces raises a number of 
questions about the American reasons for killing them 
and eliminating them so quickly and so dramatically.. 
Was assassinating and killing them in an unequal 
battle an American requirement to add more mystery and 
sensationalism to the American game in Iraq or the 
American crime in Iraq?..  The most sensational 
objective of all in killing the Iraqi President's sons 
is the U.S. administration's desire to achieve a media 
victory for the sake of American public opinion. 
HALE