August 13, 2003
IRAQ: JORDAN EMBASSY BOMBING A 'WORRISOME' SIGN
** The bombing is an
"act of cowardice" committed by enemies of "every true
** Commentators disagree on
the causes and culprits of the "deliberate" attack.
** The shortage of basic
services and insecurity is "the mother of all problems" in Iraq.
** "Anarchy" is a
sign that the U.S. must "change course" and agree to a UN mandate.
The 'only losers' in the 'dastardly' attacks are the Iraqi
people-- Commentators worldwide
condemned the bombing as an act of "treachery and ingratitude." London-based, Arab-nationalist Al-Arab
Al-Alamiyah charged: "It shed blood uselessly and annihilated people
who were blameless." Arab outlets
blasted the "cowards" who "know only the language of force and
violence." Saudi Arabia's moderate Riyadh
Daily opined that the bombing will "certainly jolt" the
'It will be almost impossible to know the real reason' for the
attack-- Many writers argued that the bombing was
calculated to "strike at the heart" of the "collaborative
relationship" between the U.S. and Jordan.
Others speculated that the attackers sought to "punish" Jordan
for granting exile to Saddam's daughters.
Egypt's sensationalist Al-Usbu fingered INC leader Ahmad Chalabi,
who "has a score to settle with Jordan." According to European analysts, the
"planning and reconnaissance" pointed to the "worrisome
'Al-Qaidization'" of Iraq. Jordan's
center-left Al-Dustour rejected the notion that "professional
terrorism" had arrived in Iraq, arguing that "what is happening
is...a popular resistance."
'Violence thrives' amidst a 'breakdown' of civil and economic
conditions-- European outlets blamed
violence and instability on the U.S.' inability to "control things"
in Iraq. "Offended interests,
wounded pride," coupled with energy and fuel shortages have gotten America
in "deep trouble." The
decision to dissolve "all security, law-enforcement and military
establishments" has created a "climate of hatred, fear, and
resentment." With the U.S. having
"bitten off more that it can chew," Austria's liberal Der Standard
cautioned, "the Iraqi population regards [American troops] as unloved
occupiers to be got rid of as soon as possible."
'Only a UN-led effort can do the required job'-- Saudi Arabia's moderate Al-Watan
contended that "U.S. forces will never be able to control security and
stop looting." Outlets worldwide
asserted that a UN mandate would be "indispensable" for restoring
order to Iraq. Germany's centrist Badische
Zeitung urged the U.S. to "change course" by transferring
leadership to the UN and focusing on "civil efforts." Lebanon's English-language Daily Star
judged that "the UN retains the legitimacy for nation-building that the
U.S. and UK lack."
EDITOR: Andrew Borda
EDITOR'S NOTE: This analysis is based on 39 reports from 14
countries, August 7-12, 2003. Editorial
excerpts from each country are listed from the most recent date.
BRITAIN: "Who Stands Behind The Bombing Of The Jordanian
Embassy In Baghdad"
London-based, Arab nationalist, anti-U.S. Al-Arab al-Alamiyah
(8/11): "More than one organization is potentially responsible for the
condemned attack on the Jordanian embassy in Baghdad for more than one
reason.... It shed blood uselessly and
annihilated people who were blameless and had no connection to the reasons that
stand behind the attack, whatever those reasons may be.... It wanted...to push the relations between the
two countries toward the breaking point....
If the bombing of the Jordanian embassy is merely an act of revenge,
then such a thing is difficult to accept in light of the political act that
accompanied it.... It is unlikely to be
revenge because Jordan accepted a few thousand American soldiers on its soil at
the same time as the US attack on Iraq....
The execution of an attack such as this requires the planning and
supervision of an organization that is capable of organized action, not just
numbers of those who want revenge....
The attack on the Jordanian embassy is aimed at preventing Jordan from
complying with an American request to send Jordanian forces to Iraq to take
over security duties from US forces."
FRANCE: “Violence Shakes Baghdad”
Agnes Rotivel commented in Catholic La Croix
(8/8): “One hundred days after George W. Bush triumphantly declared the end of
the war in Iraq and the official launching of the process of reconstruction and
democratization, the number of dead and wounded among the American troops is
increasing. Since May they have been
attacked almost on a daily basis.... It
is difficult to tell, with this new attack, if the Jordanian government was
targeted for accepting to harbor two of Saddam Hussein’s daughters or for its
allegiance to the U.S.”
Philippe Waucampt in wrote regional Le
Republicain Lorrain (8/8): “If we needed proof that the American presence in
Iraq is having the opposite result of what was hoped for by Washington, the
attack against the Jordanian embassy in Baghdad is it.”
"Encircled By Enemies"
Center-left Sueddeutsche Zeitung of
Munich noted (8/11): "U.S. administrator Paul Bremer…is afraid of
'large-scale terrorist attacks' without presenting any evidence. And because this is so, the suspicion remains
that, in view of the problems in Iraq, he is again referring to the dangers
from the past.... But in view of the
many Islamists, Saddamists, and other militants, the United States is
threatened in Iraq not only with losing peace but also with losing a clear
enemy image. Washington is unable to
explain to the Americans the series of attacks against U.S. soldiers nor does
the U.S. government have any concept how to break resistance. But if the Americans want to know why they
have so much difficulty in a liberated Iraq, they should only look at the
protests because of energy and fuel shortages.
This is the ground on which violence thrives."
Centrist Der Tagesspiegel of Berlin
judged (8/11): "The Arab League
decided not to recognize the Governing Council set up by the Americans in
Iraq.... It is certainly right that the
situation in Iraq is not satisfying, but the Council is more representative
than all governments that the country had over the past 30 years. The Arab governments again demonstrated an
obstructionist attitude instead of actively helping building a better Iraq--and
probably a better Middle East. The swift
defeat in Iraq deeply hurt the Arab pride.
But the despots of the region do not want to learn their lesson from
it. Otherwise, they would have to admit
that they possibly enjoy as little support as Saddam Hussein did. The Arab governments are not interested in a
democratic Iraq, since it would only tell them what the other countries in the
region do not have."
"Deadly Double Game"
Center-left Sueddeutsche Zeitung of
Munich editorialized (8/8): "In the case of Iraq, Jordan has always played
a double game that is so typical of the region.
And it is clear that it did not only make friends with such a
policy. On the one hand, Jordanian
politicians condemned the U.S. war...but, on the other hand, the Hashemite King
also closely saw to it that it did not sow of the branch on which it was
sitting, i.e., the Americans were secretly supported by Amman.... The old Iraqi power clique has reason enough
to harbor a grudge against the neighbor....
In addition, a man survived in the new power structures in Iraq, who
waged a personal campaign against the Jordan Monarchy: Ahmad Chalabi head of
the Iraqi National Congress and a leading member of the newly installed
Governing Council. He was sentenced to
22-years in prison in Amman and considers himself a victim of a plot between
former King Hussein and Saddam.... There
are several possible motives to choose this terrorist target. Jordan has enemies in many Iraqi camps, but
the damage will not hit the government in Amman alone. This attack, too, hits the Americans, since
everybody can now again see how little they have control over events."
Christoph von Marschall noted in centrist Der
Tagesspiegel of Berlin (8/8): "There are two possibilities of who
could be behind the attack: First, some Iraqis hate Jordan, since they want to
see Saddam's family before a court, not in exile in Amman. This would mean: this form of resistance is
directed against the old regime and its friends, less against the U.S. But explanation two seems more
plausible. The conflict in Iraq attracts
radical Islamists from all over the world, and they turn the country into a
combat zone like earlier in Afghanistan and Chechnya. Their enemy is not only the West and Russia
but also moderate Arab elites. They also
have in the cross hair those who secretly feel a malicious glee toward the U.S. This clarifies the fronts. The failure of the
radicals is in the western interest--and the Arab world."
"U.S. Must Change Course"
Centrist Badische Zeitung of Freiburg
judged (8/8): "With every violent act, uncertainty and despair will
grow. At the same time, the U.S. and
Britain are less and less able to implement something that deserves the term
'reconstruction.' Without safe roads,
without energy, schools and work, the Iraqis cannot be won for a western
oriented, democratic state. Regardless
of the dispute over pretended or real reasons to go to war, this would be
tantamount to a fiasco for the U.S. What
possibilities do the Bush administration have?
Change course: from military offensives to civil efforts, from acting on
its own to joint activities under the roof of the UN. If we interpret yesterday's talks in Moscow
correctly, the signs of such a move are favorable. A light in the tunnel on this day or
"Bombing Will Have Two Effects"
Right-of-center Neue Presse of Hanover
wrote (8/8): "This malicious bomb that killed 11 people in front of the
Jordanian embassy, should have two effects.
On the one hand, it demonstrated that neither U.S. forces nor the newly
established Iraqi police force in Baghdad are able to control things. On the other hand, it sent a message to the
Arab world: Those who--like Jordan--have friendly relations with the U.S. will
be punished. The situation is precarious,
since the U.S. is not only trying to create peace in Iraq but stability in the
entire region. If the impression gains
the upper hand that the U.S. is able to bomb countries in ruins, but unable to
install law and order, then this will be grist to the mill of all Islamic
"U.S. Cannot Succeed With Military Measures
Center-right General-Anzeiger of Bonn
asserted (8/8): "The attack on Jordan's embassy in Baghdad is not only the
most serious since the end of the war.
It also reveals a new quality, because it is not directed against the
armed forces of the winners but against an Arab neighboring country and did not
show any consideration of Iraqi victims.
This makes it difficult ascribing the attack to a certain group. Some aspects refer to Islamic terrorists
rather than Iraqi guerrilla forces. With
such attacks, Iraq will not come to rest quickly.... The activities of bomb plotters and snipers
cannot be stopped with military measures alone.
And that is why it is time to address these problems more
comprehensively than the victorious powers do; they have been discredited
anyway because of the many mistakes they made."
"Hope For Normalcy Seriously Shaken"
Right-of-center Thueringer Allgemeine of
Erfurt opined (8/8): "The hope for
normalcy in Iraq has now been seriously shaken.
The series of attacks will not stop soon. And it will not change even if Iraq embarks
on the path of a democratically elected government. Whatever we may think of the war, it would be
shortsighted to wish to the Americans that they may get bogged down with their
pacification attempt. The 'Old Europe,'
if there is a new resolution, will be forced to help organize the post-war
times anyway. Even if the price is the
loss of lives."
"Revenge For Jordan's Backing Of War"
Center-right Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung
of Essen expressed (8/8): "In addition to the anarchy which the terrorists
are now exploiting, it is also possible that a secret delight of some Iraqis
may plays a role.... Jordan backed the
U.S. invasion plans of Iraq and yesterday's attacks against the Embassy in
Amman could be the revenge for this. This cowardice crime will not meet with
disdain everywhere in the Arab world."
“The U.S. Opens To UN On Iraq”
Leading, business-oriented Il Sole-24 Ore
noted (8/12): “Because of the escalation of the tension, both U.S. and
international political initiatives aimed at fostering Iraq’s stability could
get further boost. A new UN resolution,
according to rumors from the British press, could certify the creation of the
Iraqi provisional government, thus offering new relief to the mission currently
head by the U.S. and Great Britain. The
resolution, which could even be decided in the next hours, would establish a
mission of assistance labeled United Nations.... However, also the domestic mood, both in the
U.S. and Great Britain, continues to be marked by disputes over the Iraqi
“Washington Is Now Asking The UN For Help”
Pro-Democratic Left party organ L’Unità
editorialized (8/12): “The U.S. might submit the draft of a new resolution on
Iraq to the UN Security Council today.
The document should include (UN’s) support to the Iraqi Provisional
Government...and the creation of a UN assistance mission to Iraq. The French foreign ministry confirmed this
news, leaked by diplomatic sources in New York.
Washington delivered an informal draft copy to Great Britain, China,
France and Russia.... The U.S. final
objective is really to obtain as soon as possible...the approval of a
resolution on upcoming reconstruction of Iraq.... A new clear UN’s mandate, which would
includes a considerable deployment of means as well as troops, could allow the
Americans to reduce their expenses...for employment, a billion dollar per
"The Arab World And Its Difficult
Leading centrist Corriere della Sera
opined (Internet Version 8/11): "Before the military operations got under
way in Iraq, the U.S. president said that the war would help to bring democracy
to the Middle East. In Iraq, the
country's political reconstruction is not taking off as scheduled. The government council lacks real authority,
and is made up of people who only theoretically represent the ethnic and religious complexity of that society. The deadly mechanism of the terrorist
attacks and of [the subsequent] mop-up operations has created a climate of
hatred, fear, and resentment, in which it is impossible to make any long-term
plans.... It continues to attribute
responsibility for the guerrilla warfare to Saddam and to Usama Bin Laden,
without admitting that the resistance (because, by now, that is what it is) is
also the result of offended interests, wounded pride, and a general breakdown
in civil and economic conditions.
Perhaps the United States has not yet understood that Saddam's regime,
despite its enormous vices, had nevertheless created a nationalist and
socialist welfare state that provided many social strata with advantages that
were not always illegitimate.... Jordan,
after the terrorist attack [against its embassy] in Baghdad, realized it was
the soft underbelly of the US coalition.
In 1991, at the time of the first Gulf War, King Hussein decided to side
with Saddam. Today, his son has decided
to side with Washington, and hopes that one day historians will not say of his
country: it made the wrong choice twice."
"A Political Void"
Leading centrist La Stampa wrote (8/9):
"The small-time guerrilla action that confuses and bleeds the GIs dry has
taken a quality leap.... In fact, this
is about restructuring the entire Middle East, from top to bottom. How?
By exporting democracy once it takes hold in Iraq.... Do those in charge realize that a beautiful
military victory is liable to end in ashes if the policy baggage does not follow? Saddam is no longer to be contended with,
kaput. A hunted man cannot direct a
Resistance that is, after all, not a real resistance. They are episodes of spontaneousness,
provoked by the composite ethnic and religious reality of the country, by a pernicious
mixture of delusion and archaic nationalism.
Starting from this postulate, the U.S. can sow democracy in
"Saddam's Former Allies Are In Danger"
Yuliya Petrovskaya suggested in centrist Nezavisimaya
Gazeta (8/8): "The explosion is not necessarily linked with Amman's
stand on the last war or the Embassy's postwar activities. There may be an Israeli aspect to it. (Israel and Jordan are known to have signed a
peace treaty that has enraged the nationalists.) The bomb might also have been meant for the
occupation forces. Anyway, it is
Saddam's former allies who are getting targeted, which must give Moscow
something to think about."
"100 Days After Victory"
Aleksandr Reutov commented in reformist
business-oriented Kommersant (8/8): "The 100 days since the
official end of the war in Iraq have proved enough for the U.S. military to
realize that large-scale mop-up operations do not improve its relations with
the local population. A rise in the
national liberation movement bears that out.
From now on Iraq's security committee will be in charge of punitive
operations. In the longer term
Washington hopes to see the UN international forces take over responsibility. Russia seems to agree with that."
AUSTRIA: “New Old World In The Middle East”
Liberal Der Standard contended (8/12):
“The good news is that the U.S. is beginning to realize that it has got itself
into deep trouble in Iraq, despite the short and successful war. As is well known, recognizing a problem is
the first step towards solving it. This
process is going to hurt, because it entails the admission that the U.S. has
bitten off more than it can chew: In order to stuff holes in Iraq, others have
to be opened. In concrete terms, this
means Afghanistan, where a certain Usama Bin Laden, who, unlike Saddam Hussein,
really was involved in the attacks of 9/11, could still be hiding at the border
with Pakistan.... The worst news,
however, nonchalantly presented by US administrator Paul Bremer, is that the
U.S. is facing a problem with Wahhabi forces in Iraq, exactly those that the
war in Iraq was supposed to help keep in check.
Ansar-al-Islam, which, Taliban style, reigned over a small empire in the
Kurdish-autonomous area before the war, is allegedly behind the attack on the
Jordanian embassy in Baghdad, the worst attack of the occupation era so
far.... The point of the war in Iraq was
to create a new order for the region.
However, at the end of the day, this order could look very different
from what President George W. Bush had planned.
At the moment, helplessness rules--the old order is no longer working,
the new one not yet.”
“The US: Unloved, Discredited”
Liberal Der Standard argued (8/12): “In
the chaos that followed the fall of the regime in Baghdad, the coalition has
acted rather helplessly.... The
coalition forces had to realize that, despite the general relief about the end
of the dictatorship, the Iraqi population regards them as unloved occupiers, to
be got rid of as soon as possible.... In
the near future, the coalition forces will continue to carry the main
responsibility for security, supplies, reconstruction, and political innovation
in Iraq. Nothing can change this fact,
not even the stationing of mini contingencies in the region from several other
states, which is a gesture of political solidarity, but can neither make the
coalition more efficient, nor ease the financial burden on the exploding U.S.
budget. If countries such as Germany,
France, or Turkey were to participate, the situation would be very
different. For this to happen, however,
a UN mandate would be indispensable. In
the interest of transatlantic relations, it would be a welcome development if
such a cooperation was to be initiated--despite the fact that those countries
were against the war, and despite the American reluctance to involve the UN.”
IRELAND: "An Attack On U.S.-Jordan
The center-left Irish Times judged
(8/8): “The campaign in Iraq to capture
or kill members of Saddam's circle is having little effect on the level of
resistance.... The targeting of the
embassy is also a deliberate attack on what is perceived by many in the Arab
world to be the close relationship between the U.S. and the Hashemite kingdom
of Jordan.... The timing of the attack,
hard on the heels of this visit and of another by General Abizaid to Amman,
seems calculated to strike at the heart of the collaborative relationship
between Jordan and the U.S.... It was a
deliberate attack involving planning, reconnaissance and the acquisition of
explosives and means of delivery. All of
these elements suggest a collaborative effort on the part of many
SPAIN: "Violence In Iraq Takes One More
Independent El Mundo asserted (8/8):
"This action [against the Jordanian Embassy in Baghdad]...has the same
characteristics of Koranic fervor and appeal to the unity of Islam as that of
al-Qaida. The attack yesterday is not
defending against the invader carried out by the remnants of the old regime...
but an attack against an Arab country made by fundamentalists. Iraq is suffering from a worrisome
"Escalation In Iraq"
Left-of-center El País judged (8/8):
"The attack...is one more step in the harassment of the occupying
army. The U.S. has not prepared its
troops for the consolidation of an organized resistance in Iraq.... Insecurity increases instead of diminishing
and the slow drip of casualties demands a review of a wrong strategy. In the present atmosphere, the reconstruction
of the Arab country and its economic revival are only a theory, as is the
possibility of organizing a quick transition to Iraqi self-government with any
guarantee of normality."
EGYPT: "Jordanian Embassy In Baghdad"
State-owned daily-of-record Al-Ahram
noted (8/11): "Targeting the Jordanian embassy in Baghdad is an alarming
development in the Iraqi question. That the blast is alarming is due to its
context and implications, not to the violence that characterizes it.... There is so far no definite framework within
which it is possible to pinpoint a reason for the embassy being targeted. There are some who link the blast to the two
daughters of the deposed president Saddam having taken refuge in Amman. Others link the blast to the extremist Ansar
al-Islam group. A third party refers to
probable involvement of elements of the al-Qaida organization. At any rate, we see momentous significance in
the Jordanian press's references to so-called new Iraqi enemies to Jordan who
have opinions on a monarchical system of rule for Iraq, on the way Iraqis in
Jordan are treated and on Jordan's relations with the former Iraqi regime. Whatever the reason for it is, the blast
carries very grave indications of the existence in Iraq of currents playing
dangerous games there. These currents
are so manifold as to add to the problems of an already problem-ridden
country. They are most probably well organized
and greatly able to inflict harm as the size of the Jordanian embassy's blast
shows. Such currents should be dealt
"Did Chalabi Stage the Bombing of Jordan's
Independent, sensationalist weekly Al-Usbu
opined (8/11): "More than one reason makes accusing Ahmad Al-Chalabi of
staging the bombing of the Jordanian embassy seem plausible.... Sources say that the eighth group in the
private security office of the Iraqi National Congress (INC) led by Ahmad Al-Chalabi
executed the attack to take revenge against Jordan.... Ahmad Al-Chalabi, an international con
artist, is the leader of the so-called INC....
It is no secret that he has a score to settle with Jordan, where he is
wanted for trial on charges of fraud, embezzlement and breach of trust, after
the Petra Bank that he founded in 1989 went bankrupt. The Jordanian Prime Minister had reiterated
Jordan's accusations against Ahmad Al-Chalabi, two days before the incident. Thus the attack could be seen as in
retaliation to these statements."
"A Cowardly Act"
State-owned daily-of-record Al-Ahram
(Internet Version 8/9): "The destructive explosion that occurred near the
Jordanian embassy in Baghdad, claiming the lives of dozens of innocent Iraqis
and Jordanians, was a cowardly act. The
expected result of this act is that the U.S. and British occupation forces
would impose further restrictions on the movement of Iraqi civilians; thereby,
causing further unease to their daily lives..... This would naturally aggravate the already
tense atmosphere, delay the restoration of power to the Iraqi people, and
prompt the occupation regime to stay in Iraq for a longer period of time. This cowardly act would also provide the U.S.
and British occupiers with another excuse for staying in Iraq for a longer
period of time. The occupation forces would cite the reason for this on the
pretext of fighting against terrorism, against the remnants of the supporters
of the ousted Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, and perhaps against elements of
the al-Qaida organization. Because
these attacks are not likely to stop, the occupation forces will stay in Iraq
for a longer period of time under this pretext. The main and perhaps the only
loser are the Iraqi people. Attacking
the Jordanian embassy on the pretext that Jordan has provided the right of
residence to the two daughters of Saddam Hussein is unjustifiable.... No one would blame the Iraqis if they resist
the occupation forces with all possible means. However, the least, which could
be said about targeting the embassy of a fraternal Arab country, is that it is
an act of treachery and ingratitude. It
is noteworthy that Jordan has often supported the Iraqi people in their
predicament and in their wars, which their former reckless leadership involved
them against Iran and Kuwait."
SAUDI ARABIA: "War Of Car Bombings"
Riyadh's conservative Al-Riyadh
editorialized (8/9): "The bombing of the Jordanian Embassy in Baghdad
brings back to the American memory the war of embassies and car bombings in
Lebanon. It is also a reason for worry
and concern for U.S. policy toward the security situation. Was it a message to Washington and Amman...or
was it preparatory to drag Jordan, Arab and foreign capitals into the war in
"Terror In Iraq"
English-language moderate Riyadh Daily
professed (8/9): "Whatever the reason, professional terrorism has finally
come to Iraq. Assuming from reports that
the terror act, which took several lives besides severely damaging the
Jordanian mission, has been committed by Iraqis, it is truly unfortunate that
the day has come when Arabs have begun taking on Arabs by way of terrorism.... If the ubiquitous al-Qaida hand is seen in
the blast, it complicates much of the security scenario in the country.... In fact, the entire Arab world now stands at
a crossroads as to the shape of its relations with Baghdad. Jordan and other neighboring countries are
only too eager to renew the close links they enjoyed with the country for
years, till Saddam's Kuwait adventure.
Thursday's bombing has certainly jolted the normalization process, but
the efforts toward that goal remain strong as yet.
"The lack Of Security"
Moderate Abha Al-Watan judged (8/8):
"The bombing of the Jordanian embassy in Baghdad raised many questions on
its political motive, those who stand behind it, and effectiveness of the U.S.
security measures to protect official institutions and the interests of that
country, which is plagued by anarchy....
The U.S. forces will never be able to control security and stop looting
and internal fighting in [Iraq]. The
bombing of the Jordanian embassy in central Baghdad where US troops are present
in force shows the United States' weakness in this respect.... Irrespective of the parties that may be
suspected of carrying out the bombing of the Jordanian embassy, the incident
means that U.S. security is infiltrated to a great extent and that Washington
needs to reconsider its alliances inside Iraq."
Strike Our Embassy In Baghdad?”
Semi-official, influential Al-Rai carried
(8/11): “Those who struck our embassy on Thursday wanted to choke off the
Iraqis and tighten the noose around them because they (who did it) were angered
that this vein should continue to provide life and renew air supply. Those who committed the bombing were also
enraged when they learned of our embassy’s history and examined its role and
accomplishments so that once “rule” collapsed and chaos prevailed, they
targeted it thinking that they could topple the mast that hold this Jordanian
characteristic.... The Jordanian Embassy
will remain so long as the Iraqis--who value this Embassy’s role and who have
announced over the past hours their pride in its role--remain. The Jordanian Embassy will remain so long as
Jordan believes in its pan-Arab and humanitarian role and in defending its
interests too. Jordan will not be held
back by the hatred of malevolent people.”
“A War Is Over And A War Has Begun”
Semi-official, influential Al-Rai
expressed (8/11): “Richard Myers, U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
has finally confessed that the war is not over and that U.S. forces are facing
a special kind of war in central Iraq, but claimed that his statement does not
contradict the U.S. President’s statement that the war is over. This is because the President said that the
main operations are over and did not mean the resistance of the Iraqi people,
something not expected by the U.S., which was convinced by the new (Iraqi)
governors and the Iraqi opposition abroad that U.S. soldiers would be
considered liberators and not occupiers and that the Iraqis will receive them
with roses and not bullets.... The
Iraqis do not need anyone to instigate them to exercise violence. Violence is their right and the right of all
peoples who are under foreign occupation.
Violence is a popular resistance that cannot be compared to the violence
of a foreign occupation and its coercive methods.”
“Bremer And The Iraqi Resistance”
Influential center-left Al-Dustour noted
(8/11): “It is certain that the operations against U.S. occupation forces in
Iraq are not acts by individuals and they do not belong to a specific
organization. These operations have
spread across Iraq and they tend to be more concentrated in the Sunni areas of
central and west Iraq.... Bremer...fears
an alliance between Ansar Al-Islam and al-Qaida
He is focused on that and does not mention the word 'resistance' even
once. It is as if we are going to witness a new twist to the idea of combating
terrorism, but this time in the Iraqi arena.
This is an idea that appeals to the U.S. citizen who still pictures the
destruction of the two towers.... What
is happening is close to a popular resistance in the making. It is spreading on a daily basis all across
Iraq. One cannot ignore what happened in
Basra, the well know Shiite area, and consider it an act that is separate from
the fedayeen operations. Indeed, it
should be looked at as the start of a true popular revolution with all this
U.S.-British fumbling about in Iraq’s affairs.... We believe that the bombing of the Jordanian
Embassy is nothing but a suspect incident that seeks to shuffle the cards and
as we said in a previous commentary, we must search for the beneficiary of this
act, which will not necessarily be outside the circle of the ruling right wing
alliance in Israel and Washington.”
"Was the Embassy Bombing Preplanned?"
The Independent, English-language Jordan
Times asserted (8/10): "One could come up with many theories why the
Jordanian embassy in Baghdad was the target of Thursday's cowardly bomb attack
that killed at least 19 people and wounded over 50. Whatever the theory, it is fact that the
attack challenged Jordan's steadfast belief in Arab nationalism and its sense
of responsibility towards other Arabs.
The way in which the bombing was carried out and the vandalism that
followed indicate that the incident was preplanned. One theory is that the attack was carried out
in retaliation for Jordan's gesture of granting humanitarian asylum to Saddam Hussein's
two daughters.... Another theory is that
al-Qaida or its associate Ansar Al Islam group was behind the blast. Although
Jordan has been in the gun sights of al-Qaida it is still perplexing why the
group would target the Kingdom's mission in Baghdad when other targets in the
Iraqi capital exist which better fit their target profile. The flimsiest theory of all is that Jordan
is seen as having monarchical interests in Iraq which led to resentment among
Iraqis. But the one theory that may hold
water is that the attack was the climax of a campaign against the Kingdom
launched through a newspaper owned or controlled by Ahmed Chalabi, a fugitive
convicted of bank fraud and embezzlement in Jordan."
“The Bombing Is Aimed At Breaking Solidarity ”
Independent, mass-appeal Al-Arab Al-Yawm
remarked (8/10): “It is our duty to say that whoever killed innocent lives and
bombed the embassy is not a pure Iraqi.
The Iraqis, who are suffering from the occupation and of depression, are
aware that their problem is not with a brother but with a clearly defined
enemy. Therefore, whoever did this is an
enemy of the Iraqis and of the Jordanians and of every true Arab and
Muslim.... We must take it easy before
we issue any verdicts and before we hold one party or another responsible for
this act. However, we are well aware that whoever bombed the embassy did not
seek to destroy the building, but wanted to break the state of solidarity with
Iraq and to spark Jordanian anger, even if temporary, against Iraq and its people
and to lead us to something that contradicts our Arab-Jordanian traditions and
The independent, English-language Jordan
Times remarked (8/8): "The attack on the Jordanian embassy in Baghdad
is a dastardly act by elements or groups that know only the language of force
and violence. While it is too early to
identify the real people who stood behind this act of terrorism, it is obvious
that they are against not only the bilateral relations between Iraq and Jordan
but also the interests, security and stability of Iraq itself and its people.
What is also clear is that there are factions in Iraq which do not wish to
restore normalcy to the country so that it may begin a new chapter in its
political and economic life. What did Jordan
do to deserve such an action? Jordan consistently stood by Iraq, before and
after the U.S. and British occupation of the country, and it continues to lend
support to the urgent calls for ending this occupation.... Jordan also refused to recognize even the
interim Governing Council as long as it is not an elected body that represents
the Iraqi people. The Kingdom stood by
the Iraqi people providing food and medicine and other forms of relief aid to
ease their suffering.... Accordingly, we
call on all the Arab countries as well as the international community to
condemn the attack on the Jordanian embassy in the clearest and firmest terms
and to insist on apprehending the perpetrators and bringing them to
justice. Above all we expect the Iraqi
authorities to pursue a thorough search for the perpetrators of this terrorist
attack against Jordan so that a full investigation may be conducted and any
other potential threats to anyone be thwarted."
LEBANON: “The Ugly Specter Of Regional Tensions
In Post-War Iraq”
The English-language Daily Star held
(8/8): “The death and destruction that occurred Thursday at the Jordanian
Embassy...is a senseless human tragedy for those who suffered or died, and a
terrible political omen for short-term efforts to stabilize Iraq and look
forward to a better future for the Iraqi people. The frightening specter that raises its head
relates to one of the dangers that many in this region and abroad pointed out
before the war started--that ‘regime change’ by foreign military force might
rid the Iraqi people of a brutal dictatorship, but it could also unleash forces
for regional tension and instability that would be hard to control.... We hope that the attack against the Jordanian
Embassy was an isolated incident whose motivations or causes can be identified
and contained. But one should not rule
out the awful possibility that this is an ugly sign of post-war Iraq impacting
on regional relationships.... The longer
that the Anglo-American-led occupation of Iraq goes on, the more obvious it
becomes that only a UN-led effort can do the required job. The UN retains the legitimacy for
nation-building that the U.S. and UK lack.”
“Occupation And Security”
Moderate anti-Syrian An-Nahar opined
(8/8): “The method of bombing the
Jordanian Embassy represents a qualitative and dangerous step in the level of
security chaos in Iraq, and the level of violence. As for the reason behind choosing the
Jordanian Embassy...it will be difficult and almost impossible to know the real
reason: Jordan is creating speculation
in Iraq. It is criticized by some Iraqis
for receiving Saddam’s daughters and for its ambiguous position on the Iraqi
Governing Council--despite its closeness to the U.S. Others believe that the U.S. was behind the
explosion because it was disappointed in its Arab friends, including Jordan,
for not taking a positive position on the Iraqi Governing Council.... In any case, and whoever is behind the
bombing, there is no doubt that the UN (not the U.S.) is needed to fully
supervise the transition of Iraq to the Iraqis.”
CHINA: "Insecurity Is Mother Of Problems In
Official English-language Beijing Xinhua
judged (8/7): "There is a consensus among the 25- million Iraqis that
insecurity in post-Saddam Iraq is "the mother of all problems" in the
war-torn country. The devastating
explosion on Thursday in front of the Jordanian embassy in the fashionable
district of al-Mansour, west Baghdad, came as another example of the chaotic
situation in Iraq.... Since the sudden
downfall on April 9 of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein in the US-led war,
Iraq has become a land of lawlessness, looting, arson and crime.... What added to these problems is the decision
of Paul Bremer, the head of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), to
dissolve all security, law-enforcement and military establishments of the
Saddam regime without being able to replace them quickly.... Bremer's decision to dissolve the
400,000-strong 82-year-old Iraqi army was, according to observers, one of the
untimely decisions that further exacerbated the issue of insecurity and
unemployment in Iraq. The decision
played into hands of those Iraqis who are bent on 'armed resistance against the
foreign occupiers of the beloved motherland.'"
PAKISTAN: "Strong Iraqi Resistance Against
Mass-circulation, Urdu-language Nawa-e-Waqt
remarked (8/12): "The Iraqi resistance has gained momentum with riots
taking place throughout Iraq.... To date
59 Americans have been killed in Iraq; as the armed resistance gets more
organized, the death toll is expected to mount.... Now neither America or any of its allies can
say that they have invaded the country with the support of Iraqis in order to
improve the lot of the people.... Democracy-loving America should not ignore
the collective voice of Iraqis and should withdraw its troops from the country
as soon as possible."