The Press : The Gulf Crisis: Finding Fault

Editorial comment from around the world reveals some sharply differing perspectives on the current confrontation in the Persian Gulf. The Saudi press may be vitriolic in its condemnation of Saddam Hussein, for example, but a major Palestinian weekly published in East Jerusalem puts the blame for the crisis squarely on the United States. The Japanese press is proud that its government acted more boldly than usual in declaring an Iraqi oil boycott, but France’s Le Monde reflects concern that Washington may be about to drag its allies deeper into crisis than they want to go.

“Many Japanese decisions to impose economic sanctions in the past were delayed, because the Japanese government lacks autonomy or independence in its diplomacy. As a result, Japan usually makes its decision after seeing what Europe and America intend to do. However, it should be highly evaluated that Japan has made the decision comparatively quickly this time . . .

“At a time like this, even if sacrifices must be made, we must abide by international opinion with simple honesty. That is the path that Japan, which until now been evaluated only for its economic power, should seek.”

-- Asahi Shimbun (Tokyo)

“Saddam got it wrong when his smash-and-grab raid on Iran dragged on for nearly a decade. He got it wrong again when he discounted world reaction to his invasion of Kuwait this month. But he hung on against an enemy three times larger for eight years without defeat; he still holds Kuwait, from which his enemies cannot evict him without ruining what they want to save, and there can be no denying that he has the capacity to surprise us all. To say he is just feeling vulnerable and lonely is to make the same kind of mistake as those who claim all bullies are cowards. Saddam Hussein should not be underestimated or written off--a warning that the Iranians probably need rather less than anyone else.”

-- The Guardian (London)

“Saddam is not crazy, for if he were, he would not have achieved the military success he has done so far. He is a shrewd, cold-blooded megalomaniac, carefully considering every move he makes. But that is not what concerns the world. Even that can be dealt with. His ridiculous propaganda against the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, a country that clothed and fed his people, supported them when they were under attack, poured millions of dollars daily to support their causes, can be put down to his own desperation and treachery. How could a man who shot 21 of his own Cabinet ministers have serious intentions in the spread of Islam? What sort of leader who turns a blind eye to the raping, looting and killing going on in a fellow Muslim country could gain the smallest modicum of trust from other Muslims? All his rantings are a mere comedy; the blackest comedy of the century. . . .

“Ultimately, he is a fool, squirming and frothing hysteria in a trench of his own making. All he can do now is spread dissension, threaten havoc and look for his own survival, politically and personally. ‘The Father-Leader’ is nothing more than a fool and a common thug; a man with a common mortal destiny he will one day share with his victims.”

-- Arab News (English-language daily in Saudi Arabia)

“In the history of crime, personal or political, seldom appears a man who is ashamed of his evil deed. Saddam has demonstrated through his successive moves since Aug. 1 that he is proud rather than repentant of his crime of savagery. . . .

Saddam ordered his troops to invade Kuwait. A supposed brother was happily killing a true brother who had resolutely stood by the side of Iraq when it was facing a formidable enemy. Saddam cut the hand that fed him for a decade. Then he planned to invade Saudi Arabia. This is the height of Saddam’s ingratitude, as during the Gulf War, the Saudi and Kuwaiti governments and people helped his regime even at the cost of their own comfort.

“This man must be stopped, because all his power and might is due only to the sacrifices of Saudi, Kuwaiti and other Gulf Arab people. . . .

“It is imperative to push Iraq back from Kuwait, restore that country to the rightful rules as demanded by its people, and above all, punish Saddam Hussein--the killer of Arabs--even if it means his removal from power. That last thing is also in the interests of the Iraqi people who have been mercilessly suppressed by the police state established by Saddam.

--Saudi Gazette

(English-language Saudi daily)

“The issue has changed from an Iraqi-Kuwaiti confrontation into an Arab-American one. . . .

We were hoping that the Arabs would be divided into three fronts, namely the two disputants and a third front, led by Egypt to mediate. We were, however, disappointed after the summit conference as the Egyptian state put its full weight behind one of the two parties, thus deepening the division and rendering impossible an Arab settlement that would remove the justification of a foreign interference.

A principle and an observation has to be asserted here. The principle is that the difference among the Arab ranks must cease immediately, or be graded down to a secondary importance once the fighting is turned into an Arab-American one. “We are not interested now in how the conflict has been transformed into its current picture! Who started the problem? Why did he start it? Was he right in triggering it? Was it possible to avoid the crisis or prevent its exacerbation? Such questions are meaningless now and are of interest only to historians. It is an interest of the Arab and Islamic peoples now that armies of all the arrogant are flocking and coming together to hit an Arab-Islamic country. . . .

“Our people cannot forgive those who invited these foreign forces to our homeland. We cannot forgive those who are enabling aliens and enemies to break our necks. . . .

“This talk is applicable to any country and any ruler. What then may be the case when the country desecrated by the foreign forces is the territory of the two holy shrines of Islam? How may disgrace and concession go as far as bringing enemies to protect the territory of Islam and its sacred places?”

-- Al Shaab

(Publication of Egypt’s opposition Socialist Labor Party)

“France and its two big Occidental allies (Britain and the United States) are not quite on the same wave length regarding the crisis in the gulf. . . .

“France’s political audience, the old and numerous friendships she maintains in the Arab world, and on the whole, the respect that she has in all the continents obliges her a certain cautiousness for which America has little concern.

“Very quickly, France sensed the danger that she was running, giving the impression of joining an old, colonial-smelling crusade on Arab ground. And she fears to be involved against her will in an American military adventure. This explains her concern to clearly disassociate herself from an attitude probably seen as too warlike. . . .

“The French position runs a long term risk. It gives Saddam Hussein reasons to hope that the ‘Occidental front’ will crack a little more each day.”

-- Le Monde (Paris)

“Evidently, the U.S. and Jordan cannot be said to have started seeing things in the same light.

“The U.S. Administration, Congress and public, had whipped up a feverish campaign against Iraq that would have been difficult to calm under any circumstances or outside influence. The campaign would have been further aggravated by the accusations that continue to fly between Washington and Baghdad over the past two days.

“Doubtless, it was painful and difficult. The question now is, if pessimism prevails, what will be next.”

-- Jordan Times (Amman)

“The drums of war are already being beaten in the Middle East, as developments in the gulf accelerate unpredictably. Unless a miracle occurs, the region appears headed for a total explosion.

“This state of affairs is the direct responsibility of the United States, which is leading the international buildup of military forces and the imposition of sanctions in an unprecedented attack on Iraq . . .

“We do not believe that U.S. moves against Iraq are based on Iraq’s occupation of Kuwait or its alleged threat to Saudi Arabia. . . . The motive for the expected U.S. attack on Iraq is . . . Iraq’s frank opposition to the United State’s treatment of the Palestinians and violation of Arab interests. . . .

“Is a Middle East Vietnam necessary to convince those who want to recolonize the region of the dangers they are dragging themselves and the world into?”

-- Al Fajr (Palestinian weekly published in East Jerusalem)

“Iraq has a key place in the Arab and Islamic world, and its past generations’ achievements are recorded in golden words. Let its present leadership not negate all that. Let the future generations of the Arabs, of Iraq itself, not curse it for acting so irrationally and arrogantly. Mr. Saddam Hussein must retrace his steps to restore honor and credibility to the Iraqi people. It’s a question of human dignity and survival.”

-- Khaleej Times (Dubai)