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 MUSCAT 000910 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR NEA/ARPI, NEA/PPD, NEA/P, AND INR/R/MR 
 
LONDON FOR TSOU 
PARIS FOR ZEYA 
USCENTCOM FOR PLUSH 
FOREIGN PRESS CENTER FOR SILAS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OIIP KPAO KMDR MU
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: U.S.-IRAN INITIATIVES, THE LESSONS OF 
IRAQ, OMANI SUPPORT FOR DIALOGUE, ECHOES FROM ABU GHRAIB 
 
¶1.  State papers voiced strong support for proposed U.S.-Iran 
dialogue, along with concern about the possibility of military 
escalation.  Private daily Al-Watan accuses the U.S. of 
insincerity for promising to hold U.S. troops accountable for 
alleged Iraqi massacres while failing to impose harsh sentences 
in the wake of Abu Ghraib.  Extensive daily news coverage of U.S.- 
Iran relations reached a crescendo on June 2-3, with all papers 
reporting on the U.S. offer to talk with Tehran and Iran's 
response. 
 
-------- 
COVERAGE 
-------- 
 
¶2.  June 1-3 headlines focused on the U.S. offer to talk with 
Iran, Omani support for that initiative, and Iran's response. Six 
editorial responses have appeared to date, four on June 2-3 alone 
(three, all locally generated, in the state daily, Oman; others 
carried syndicated columns).  Fallout from Abu Ghraib continued 
to receive some attention, with a June 3, front-page "Times of 
Oman" headline proclaiming, "U.S. Dog Handler Escapes Jail" over 
AFP coverage and a same-day editorial in Arabic daily Al-Watan 
accusing President Bush of insincerity for vowing to hold U.S. 
troops accountable if they murdered Iraqi civilians, while 
slamming light verdicts, mischaracterized as acquittal, in the 
Abu Ghraib scandal. 
 
------------------------------------ 
BLOCK QUOTES:  DIALOGUE WITH IRAN... 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶3. Government-owned Arabic daily "Oman" (circulation 38,000) gave 
a rare thumbs-up to a U.S. policy initiative in its June 2 
editorial, "Dialogue Should Prevail": 
 
"Political efforts at finding diplomatic solutions to the Iranian 
nuclear issue continue. Despite Iran's refusals of American 
conditions, U.S. readiness to dialogue alongside its European 
partners is to be considered a positive gesture.  The Sultanate 
has expressed its approval through a statement by the Ministry of 
Foreign Affairs, calling the American move the right step towards 
building a bridge for dialogue to end the Iranian crisis.  The 
world does not need more violence, especially not the Arab Gulf; 
this region has witnessed numerous conflicts within the last 
three decades.  The West, Iran, and the international community 
are all invited to sit at the negotiating table and work on 
solutions for this dilemma.  Dialogue is the best hope for real 
solutions.  Iran should find a way to ensure its counterparts 
that its nuclear programs are peaceful in nature." 
 
------------------------ 
...WITH MUCH AT STAKE... 
------------------------ 
 
¶4. "Oman" took a more admonitory tone in an editorial by 
columnist Awadh Baquir on June 3, "Region on Edge": 
 
"The war of words between Iran and America is strategic and to be 
expected in a crisis. However, there is much concern about the 
possibility that America might persuade Russia and China to 
transfer the Iranian dossier to the Security Council.  There the 
issue might escalate to a dangerous level, beginning with 
economic sanctions and ending in a repeat of the Iraqi scenario. 
America must keep lessons from Iraq in mind when dealing with 
Iran. The question that arises is:  will America take military 
action against Iran, as some Western media have suggested? Is 
this crisis really about the Iranian nuclear issue, or is it a 
pretext for a strategy to contain Iran as happened in the 80s 
under "double containment?"  There needs to be a real political 
solution for the Iranian nuclear issue, one which gives Tehran 
the right to use that technology for peaceful means while also 
assuring the international community that such technology will 
never lead to anything else." 
 
------------------------------ 
...AND THE SULTANATE'S SUPPORT 
------------------------------ 
 
¶5.  Also on June 3, Oman carried an unsigned editorial entitled, 
"Active and Far-Reaching Diplomacy": 
 
"The Sultanate is always keen to support all sincere efforts 
toward achieving the interests of the countries and peoples of 
the region, along with the stability of the region.  From the 
very beginning, the Sultanate has confirmed the importance and 
necessity of dialogue to solve differences with Iran's nuclear 
issues and has always and repeatedly expressed its support for 
negotiation, including direct negotiations between the United 
States and the Islamic Republic of Iran.  That is in light of the 
United States' active and influential role in this issue and in 
other world issues.  The Sultanate has reconfirmed this position 
in light of the new developments." 
 
------------------------------------- 
BUT CONCERNS LINGER OVER U.S. ACTIONS 
------------------------------------- 
 
¶6.  The privately owned Arabic daily "al-Watan" (circulation 
42,000) reflected on Haditha and Abu Ghraib, asking "What Do They 
Mean by Morals?": 
 
"Simultaneous with President Bush's announcement that the U.S. 
intended to confront any violation of morality and principles by 
its troops in Iraq, an American military court decided not to 
convict the soldiers who committed horrible acts in Abu Gharib 
prison.  Therefore, what does the United States mean by morality? 
Is it a public relations game included in the psychological war 
to influence its opponents?  Or is it a mere ploy by the 
Americans to improve their image as a country and present these 
crimes as individual acts?  Sorrow and sadness increased with the 
discovery of a massacre in which American Marines stormed a 
village and shot children and women after an IED hit one of their 
units.  Had the BBC not shown these images, would they confess 
their crimes? The truth is that the Americans are committing all 
these crimes to eliminate the Iraqis and to take revenge for the 
killing of their solders by the anonymous resistance." 
 
STEWART