VZCZCXRO4181
OO RUEHDE RUEHDIR
DE RUEHAD #0778/01 1341108
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 141108Z MAY 07
FM AMEMBASSY ABU DHABI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 8926
RUENAAA/SECNAV WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RHEHAAA/WHITE HOUSE WASHDC PRIORITY
RHEHNSC/WHITE HOUSE NSC WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEHZM/GULF COOPERATION COUNCIL COLLECTIVE
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 1175
RHMFIUU/COMUSNAVCENT
RHWSMRC/MCF01 SACCS USCINCCENT MACDILL AFB FL

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 ABU DHABI 000778 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR NEA/ARP; NEA/PPD; NEA/RA; INR/R/MR; PA; INR/NESA; INR/B; 
RRU-NEA 
IIP/G/NEA-SA 
WHITE HOUSE FOR PRESS OFFICE; NSC 
SECDEF FOR OASD/PA 
USCINCCENT FOR POLAD 
LONDON FOR ERELI 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: OIIP KMDR TC
SUBJECT:  SPECIAL MEDIA REACTION: CHENEY'S VISIT TO REGION 
 
¶1.  SUMMARY: Vice President Cheney's visit to the UAE enjoyed 
widespread coverage in both the Arabic and English language press. 
This included several pages of photos covering bilateral meetings. 
Editorials and opinion pieces were generally skeptical of Vice 
President Cheney's visit to the region and speculated on his 
objectives.  Some saw his visit as a sign of desperation, on the 
part of the Administration, to find a solution in Iraq.  Others saw 
his visit as a prelude to an attack on Iran.  End Summary. 
 
 
¶2. Unsigned editorial under the headline "Trips of desperation", in 
Sharjah-based Arabic daily "Al-Khaleej" (circulation 90,000) 05/10: 
 
"Dick Cheney arrived in Baghdad as part of a surprise visit hoping 
to cause a breakthrough to relieve the pressure that the U.S. 
administration is being put under.  How he will break the deadlock 
seems to be a source of confusion and frustration.  He acts like a 
war extremist who wants to run away from the irreplaceable solution, 
which is a programmed withdrawal of his troops from Iraq, and 
instead advocates the further use of force and pressures the Iraqis 
and those who have anything to do with Iraq." 
 
Cheney thinks that with a magician's brush he can alleviate the 
American predicament, so that he can say to the American people that 
the U.S. administration is making progress in achieving stability. 
In order to accomplish this, he calls on Iraqis to redouble their 
efforts to achieve national reconciliation.  The concept that the 
achievement of stability lies in the abolition of the Deputies' 
summer vacations proves that Cheney does not know how to reach his 
objectives.  There is a contradiction in what he asks for.  National 
reconciliation implies that all parties agree on a unified program. 
Perhaps the most important part of this program is to restore the 
sovereignty and independence which the occupation kicked out.  The 
goals of national reconciliation are totally incompatible with 
Cheney's objectives." 
 
"Cheney wants to legalize the occupation by striking deals with 
Iraqi forces.  He seeks to establish laws enabling U.S. oil 
companies, to which he is an essential representative, to monopolize 
Iraqi energy sources.  He also wants to make the various facets of 
the Iraqi economy exclusive to American companies to implicitly keep 
the occupation in Iraq.  Such issues violate the essence of 
sovereignty and can not be accepted by any Iraqi entity.  Real 
agreement between the Iraqi parties will not be in the interest of 
the occupation.  Even if there was an agreement between the 
individuals that serve the interests of the occupation, it will not 
guarantee the desired results, as it would not affect the behavior 
of the various Iraqi parties." 
 
"It would be ridiculous to imagine that holidays affect the 
achievement of an agreement.  Parties will remain stalled in 
negotiations if the agreement does not meet their basic needs, or 
quickly agree, if their goals are met.  Perhaps Cheney is in a 
predicament after he emphasized that the military alone is not 
enough and that political and economic issues should be taken into 
consideration.  Maybe the man, who has chosen military might as the 
final rule in settling crises, has become capable of seeing wisdom 
in a political breakthrough.  However, such wisdom comes too late. 
Following his killing of the Iraqi people and the destruction of 
their nation, Cheney has no room for any wisdom but to give in to 
the demands of all the peoples of the world:  it is high time to 
schedule the withdrawal from Iraq." 
 
¶3. Unsigned editorial under the headline "An opportunity for further 
understanding" in Abu Dhabi-based Arabic language daily "Akhbar 
Al-Arab" (circulation 25,000) on 5/10: 
 
"Many regional capitals understood, following the Sharm Al-Sheikh 
meeting, that the U.S. administration had begun to take a more 
pragmatic and flexible approach with Damascus; to work to separate 
it from Tehran and bring it closer to the general position of other 
Arabs.  The capitals were happy with this change, however, 
Washington rushed to erase this position towards Damascus when 
Cheney hasted to the region to build an isolating wall between the 
nations of the region and Syria.  This is to reiterate that U.S. 
policy vis-`-vis Syria remains unchanged and will never change and 
that what happened in Sharm Al-Sheikh was no more than political 
 
ABU DHABI 00000778  002 OF 003 
 
 
maneuvering that should not be interpreted as a change in position. 
Cheney began his tour in Iraq to reassure the government of Nouri 
Al-Malki and his aides that Washington remains committed to staying 
in Iraq, to support the new security plans, and remain tough with 
the enemies of Iraq and the U.S.; especially Syria and Iran.  Iraqi 
officials will be more open to isolating Syria, but cannot digest 
isolating Iran, due to the security, financial, political and 
sectarian ties that make dealing with Iran an extremely sensitive 
issue.  This explains Washington pressure on Malki to place Iran in 
the same category as other rogue states and enemies." 
 
"Cheney's visit carries numerous messages to numerous parties, the 
most important of which is that what happens inside the U.S., 
between the White House and the Congress, does not affect the plans 
in place for Iraq, Syria and Iran.  Cheney believes that such an 
approach pleases the region, in fact, the nations of the region 
desire traditional stability, governed by balanced relations that 
sponsor strategic, multilateral and bilateral relations among 
nations.  They think that the nations of the region are in a much 
better position to realize their own interests and the best way to 
achieve them.  The Sharm Al-Sheikh meeting was welcomed by the 
nations of the region as an attempt to solve all pending tensions 
and crises through peaceful diplomatic means, especially the Iraqi 
issue.  Cheney's visit to the region presents a good opportunity to 
reach a joint understanding on the multiple political, security, and 
humanitarian issues that are related to Iraq." 
 
¶4.  Op-ed by Saad Mehio under the headline "Unusual man on an 
unusual tour (Part 2)" in Sharjah-based Arabic language daily 
"Al-Khaleej" (circulation 90,000) on 5/11: 
 
"Dick Cheney is not a normal political figure nor a normal Vice 
President.  Therefore, his Middle Eastern tour will not be normal. 
The man is often referred to in Washington as the real authority at 
the White House.  This is true in every aspect and not only in 
foreign policy.  His authority comes from the president's absolute 
confidence in the wide network of alliances that he manages with the 
neoconservatives and fundamentalist Christians.  However, Cheney 
will be remembered by records of history for the principle of 
pre-emptive war.  He is the godfather of this principle and the 
invasion of Iraq represents only its fist phase.  Cheney was behind 
what was known as the "coup" at the White House in 2002, when he 
poured cold water on the American parties involved in a hot debate 
over Iraq, including James Baker, Colin Powell and other generals 
who opposed military action against Iraq simply because it did not 
represent any threat to the U.S.  He declared that the threat 
existed: Iraq soon could acquire nuclear weapons and may give them 
to terrorist groups.  Cheney asserts that the principle of 
pre-emptive wars will remain the main axe of American foreign policy 
in the post 9/11 era.  He believes that the principles of deterrence 
and containment, which prevailed during the cold war, are not enough 
and that the U.S. can pursue the principle of pre-emptive war due to 
its technological and military supremacy.  Bush and Cheney's 
supporters believe that such principles will lead to further 
American involvement in world affairs; starting with the Middle 
East.  Following what happened in Iraq, does Cheney remain committed 
to his pre-emptive wars?" 
 
¶5. Op-ed by Saad Mehio under the headline "Unusual man on an unusual 
tour (Part 2)" in Sharjah-based Arabic language daily "Al-Khaleej" 
(circulation 90,000) on 5/12: 
 
"We are making progress, but we have a long way to go.  I think 
everyone believes that we have some security problems and security 
threats in Iraq".  Is it possible that American Vice President 
Cheney describes the fiercest and bloodiest war in the 21st century 
as a 'security problem'?  For a moment this sounds astonishing, but 
after a while all wonders quickly vanish when we realize that Cheney 
actually views the war in Iraq in this way.  Why?  Because he 
considers it, despite its violence and the high cost to American and 
Iraqi victims, as only a temporary footnote in an integrated 
scenario for how the new world order and world security should be. 
What is this scenario?  It is of course the pre-emptive war that we 
talked about yesterday.  It is the one which the Vice President came 
to the Middle East to supervise the implementation of.  It is true 
that Cheney is the man of pre-emptive wars, but those who believe 
that the Democrats, despite the fuss they make on the war in Iraq, 
reject this Republican principle are wrong.  All they want is to 
 
ABU DHABI 00000778  003 OF 003 
 
 
implement it in a more cautious way and with fewer American losses. 
The war in Afghanistan was in fact a successful example of this 
war...  Cheney's visit to the region comes in the midst of a loud 
noise between the Republicans and Democrats over Iraq, but most 
likely this will only be a summer cloud, because no one in 
Washington wants a real withdrawal from Iraq and no one wants to 
remove the principle of "pre-emptive war" from the agenda of 
America's strategic interests in the world.  It is therefore, a 
mistake to consider Cheney's current visit to the region as a 
Republican counter offensive against the Democrats' attack on the 
Middle East that was initiated by the visit of the Speaker of the 
House.  Cheney's visit has a local agenda, but the architect of 
Bush's principles has more objectives.  These objectives are 
directly related to the coming phase of the pre-emptive wars." 
 
¶6. Op-ed by Dr. Esam Noman headlined "Bush between destructive 
August and violent September" in Sharjah-based Arabic language daily 
"Al-Khaleej" (circulation 90,000) on 5/12: 
 
"The likely timing of the strike against Iran is next August, after 
which the Bush Administration will have completed its intensive 
campaign to induce Iran to reconsider its current policy on the 
issue of uranium enrichment and other contentious issues with 
America and Europe.  One of the important American highlights is to 
dispatch Dick Cheney on an Arab tour.  During this tour the American 
Vice-President will seek to persuade Iraq's neighboring countries to 
support the American security plan and to convince the Iraqi Sunni 
leaders to end the "rebellion" and join the political process.  He 
will also work to mobilize support in the region for efforts towards 
stopping Iran's nuclear enrichment program, along with threatening 
tones towards issuing a third resolution by the UN Security Council 
to punish Iran in the event of its refusal to halt its uranium 
enrichment." 
 
 
 
 
QUINN