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

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 04 BAGHDAD 003963 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR INR/R/MR, NEA/PPD, NEA/PPA, NEA/AGS, INR/IZ, INR/P 
 
E.0. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OPRC KMDR KPAO IZ
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: IRAQI GOVERNMENT, CONSTITUTION, 
SOVEREIGNTY, FOREIGN RELATIONS; BAGHDAD 
 
SUMMARY: Discussion on the Constitution, Iraqi Sovereignty, 
and Foreign Relations were the major editorial themes of the 
daily newspapers on September 25, 2005. END SUMMARY. 
 
------------------------------- 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
------------------------------- 
 
¶A.   "Civil Disobedience" (As-Sabah, 9/25) 
¶B. "Who Apologizes to Whom?" (Ad-Dustoor, 9/25) 
¶C. "Towards More-Developed Arab Relationships" (Al-Bayyan, 
9/25) 
¶D. "Actual Attitude" (Al-Adala, 9/25) 
¶E. "Dialogue with a Bullet" (Al-Fourat, 9/25) 
¶F. "We Are Writing Our Constitution" (Al-Taakhi, 9/25) 
 
SELECTED COMMENTARIES 
---------------------------------------- 
 
¶A. "Civil Disobedience" 
(As-Sabah, independent, published this second-page editorial 
by Sa'eed Abdul Hadi) 
 
"A collection of Sunni groups from Iraq met in Amman and 
claimed that if military operations in Al-Anbar province do 
not cease, they will issue a declaration for civil 
disobedience in the province. The participants also 
confirmed that they would attempt to gather five million 
signatures to reject the constitution. It seems that they 
have two contradictory statements: they want to collect five 
million signatures to reject the constitution and, at the 
same time, they demand that security forces not attack 
terrorist havens in Ramadi and its suburbs. This call 
suggests that they want to protect those seeking to murder 
Iraqi people. 
 
"I think if Ramadi were safe, stable, and not under the 
control of terrorists, we would see this meeting held in Al- 
Anbar province, rather than Amman. Participants in the Amman 
meeting know that Ramadi is controlled by terrorists-the 
same terrorists who prevented Al-Anbar's citizens from 
voting and freely expressing their opinions. 
 
"Those participants in Amman are encouraging Iraqis in 
southern and central Iraq to establish their own federal 
territories because the Shiites have become targets in Al- 
Anbar and surrounding areas. Iraqis must not remain silent 
while their people are being killed. We must put an end to 
terror in Al-Anbar and we must kick those killers out of 
Iraqi cities. Those who met in Amman did not care about Al- 
Anbar; they have ulterior motives. To those who convened in 
Amman, I would like to say: we know that the unity of Iraq 
is in danger because you want to kill those who participate 
in the political process and you want to force Iraqis to 
implement your agenda." 
 
¶B. "Who Apologizes to Whom?" 
(Ad-Dustoor, independent, pro-coalition, no bias, secular, 
published this first-page editorial by Bassim Al-Sheikh, 
editor of the newspaper) 
 
"The incident in Basra between British troops and Iraqi 
police reflects the nature of the relationship between the 
Iraqi government and occupation forces in Iraq. It revealed 
conspiracies that occupation forces are planning against the 
Iraqi nation. 
 
"British troops freed their two soldiers from Iraqi custody 
after storming a police station flying an Iraqi flag, 
representing Iraqi sovereignty in Basra. Both soldiers were 
wearing religious uniforms and carrying weapons, claiming 
that they were on an intelligence mission when Iraqi police 
officers confronted them. This is the British version of the 
event, but it is clear that no one believes their claims 
because an intelligence mission would not be conducted in 
such a way. 
 
"How can they explain why they attacked the police station 
when the first priority of the Iraqi police is maintaining 
security in the city? More than one hundred suspects, gang 
leaders, and terrorists escaped from prison during the 
attack. We wonder if there were other ways to solve this 
crisis. Maybe the British do not want to forget that they 
are occupation forces who do not respect the authority of 
Iraqi law and the elected Iraqi government. 
"What makes matters worse is that British troops are 
demanding an official apology from the Iraqi government 
because the British claim that the two soldiers were handed 
over to militiamen by rogue elements of the Basra police 
force. This would be an additional insult to the elected 
Iraqi government; the occupiers are demanding an apology 
from the Iraqi government for fighting terrorism and 
securing the streets in Basra. We hope that our government 
will reject the request and declare that they will not 
cooperate with British troops until there is an apology from 
the British government." 
¶C. "Towards More-Developed Arab Relationships" 
(Al-Bayyan, affiliated with the Islamic Dawa Party, led by 
Al-Ja'afari, no bias, published this front-page unattributed 
editorial) 
 
"The Iraqi political spectrum is still reacting to Saudi 
Foreign Minister Saud Al-Faisal's recent statements, in 
which he criticized U.S. policy for selling Iraq to Iran. In 
fact, we did not expect our Arab brothers in Saudi Arabia 
would have this view of the Iraqi situation. This opinion 
tyrannizes the Iraqi people. How can the Iraqi people accept 
subjection to Iran while they refuse American guardianship? 
Such statements indicate that there is a large gap between 
Iraq and Saudi Arabia. They also indicate a misunderstanding 
of Iraqi issues. This is because Arab diplomatic 
representation is absent in Iraq--Arab states use indirect 
routes to address Iraq. 
 
"We reproach our Saudi brothers because they took an uneven 
and indirect path to convey their views to us. They should 
have communicated directly with their Iraqi brothers given 
the close geographic proximity between Iraq and Saudi 
Arabia. Why did they insist on expressing their opinion in 
front of the Americans? It is distressing when our brothers 
go to Washington every time they want to discuss an Iraqi 
issue, as if Washington were Iraq's guardian. 
 
"Iraq always calls for strengthening its relationships with 
Arab countries and it is eager to have an Arab presence in 
Baghdad. But, unfortunately, we see that our Arab brothers 
insist on creating a large gap between themselves and Iraq. 
Those Arab countries refuse to listen to their Iraqi 
brothers and listen only to those who have nothing to do 
with Iraqi affairs. 
 
"We hope that our brothers in Saudi Arabia and other Arab 
countries will seriously support the political project in 
Iraq and work harder to eliminate terror in Iraq that comes 
from Arab countries. We do not want them to go to others to 
discuss our issues; we want them to discuss our affairs with 
us. We hope they will participate actively in developing 
Iraq. Iraq works hard to establish close relationships with 
Arab countries and they must work harder to reciprocate." 
 
¶D. "Actual Attitude" 
(Al-Adala, daily, no bias, affiliated with Abdul Aziz Al- 
Hakim, published this page-three editorial by Dr. Ali 
Kholaif) 
 
"Some sides are releasing sensational statements that do not 
take into account actual conditions in Iraq nor the 
potential consequences of those conditions. Self-expression 
is a warranted right, but it should depend on the solid 
foundation of fact, rather than assumption or theoretical 
reason. All sides agreed that this constitution is the best 
that Iraqis can produce at this stage. That does not mean it 
is insignificant. The truth that every one should proclaim 
is: Iraqi people belong to different sects; each with its 
own demands and each trying to insert them in the 
constitution. But it is not possible to put all these 
demands in the constitution because some of them are will be 
rejected by others. Since the constitution depends on 
compromise, each sect should be willing to make concessions 
to satisfy all constituents. 
 
"Political blocks and national forces conceded demands 
because they believe that if a sect insisted on having all 
its demands met, the constitution would never be drafted. 
Unfortunately, there are some sides insisting that all of 
their demands be met at the expense of others. While some 
relinquished many of their demands, other parties introduced 
new demands as soon as old ones were met. Why do they create 
new restrictions on the constitution? This constitution can 
be modified by the subsequent National Assembly. People say 
they will have strong representation in the next Assembly 
and the electoral system will enable all Iraqis to be 
represented. Based on these facts, there is no problem in 
voting for the constitution, as there is a law that allows 
modification of some articles in the future. If we reject 
the constitution, there will be no guarantee that a future 
draft will satisfy all Iraqis. 
"It is logical that all the political entities who play 
essential roles in the political process support the 
constitution-even those regarded as objectors. Instead of 
silence, they need to show the positive results of voting 
for the constitution, rather than leaving their people to 
follow those who reject democracy in Iraq. All sides in the 
political process should support the constitution because it 
is a necessary step at this stage of Iraq's political 
process." 
 
¶E. "Dialogue with a Bullet" 
(Al-Fourat, independent, anti coalition, published this last 
page editorial by Amjad Tawfeek) 
 
"The majority of coalition troops (or occupational forces) 
are American and British due to their numbers, roles, and 
activities. I am not discussing American or British 
democracy; they are both models for western democracies 
around the whole world. But we wonder how much Iraq has 
gained from American and British democracy since the end of 
the war. 
 
"When the war started, American cruise missiles, fighter jet 
missiles, tanks, and other heavy weaponry destroyed our 
country and killed Iraqis. Then their soldiers arrived and 
deployed all over Iraq-from South to North. This is war, one 
might say. We have to sacrifice because democracy is coming. 
Then what? More months of death for our people and new mass 
graves opened for innocent Iraqis. 
 
"We do not want to discuss American and British democracy. 
But there is no such thing as a democratic fighter jet or a 
dictatorial fighter jet! No democratic tank or dictatorial 
tank; no oppressive bullet or merciful bullet. They are 
tools for one purpose: killing. 
 
"Military personnel in large combat vehicles should not be 
distributing candy to children; fighter jets cannot 
distribute vaccinations to Iraqi children. The bullet is 
always used to kill. Iraqi lands and Iraqi people have the 
solution. We should start to fight, using the power of the 
bullet to solve our crisis. This is the truth and every one 
knows it." 
 
¶F. "We Are Writing Our Constitution" 
(Al-Taakhi, affiliated with the KDP, pro-coalition, 
published this page-four editorial by Muhammad Al-Badri) 
 
"It is really astounding when people on Iraqi streets talk 
about the constitution-even children have started to ask 
their parents about this issue that dwells in everyone's 
mind. Some support it, others reject it, but rejection comes 
only from those who do not want security for their country. 
The Iraqi people are very good at discussing these matters, 
and the constitution has an essential role in securing the 
rights of all constituents of this country. 
 
"Iraq endured more than forty years with a temporary 
constitution that consisted of mere ink on paper. The 
government was oppressive: it would push anyone who 
discussed the subject into mass graves . 
 
"Today there is a chance for free expression. Iraqis have 
the right to opine about all articles of the constitution, 
to study it closely and then discuss it. It pertains to 
Iraqi lives and the future of their children; furthermore, 
it is the roadmap to social, economic, political, and legal 
structure. This structure is necessary after living in 
disorder and oppression for so long. 
"In order for this constitution to be representative of the 
opinions, ideas, and perspectives of Iraqis, it should be 
set by them, for they know their country best and they are 
the constituents. Non-Iraqis should not interfere in 
constitutional drafting; as the proverb says: the people of 
Mecca know their country best. Iraqis alone have the right 
to write their constitution after living a hell of 
successive regimes that marginalized the Kurds and others 
since 1921. 
 
"Today, Iraqis are the only ones who have the right to draft 
their constitution according to their free will, provided 
that it ensures the rights of all constituents. The others 
should not intervene, for the Iraqis-the inventors of the 
first alphabet-are capable of writing their own 
constitution." 
 
KHALILZAD