There is much frustration in the Arab world over the failure of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein to act reasonably, prudently and respectfully in regard to fellow Arab states. In fact, American saber rattling in the direction of Iraq, while clearly not desirable from the Arab perspective ? American targeting of any Arab state has been consistently denounced ? it does not unduly worry Arabs, as reflected in the Arab press.
An editorial from the London-based Asharq al-Awsat is the most stridently anti-Saddam. The editorial answers the question posed in its title, ?Who will cry for Saddam??, by saying ?There is nobody who would shed a single tear if Saddam were removed from power. The fear is that Saddam will not be removed and so the tragedy will continue on into the unforeseeable future.? The Asharq al-Awsat editorial claims that ?there is general agreement in the Arab world that if the removal of the Iraqi regime would end the crises in the region, it would be better done sooner rather than later.? Iraq is, simply put, ?incapable of changing its bad attitude or respecting the minimum level of relations with others? it can?t change its attitude in support of terrorism? will not cease threatening its neighbors, as is evidenced by the rocket strikes on Kuwait a few days before Sept. 11??
The Egyptian al-Akhbar newspaper asks, exasperated, ?What is the motive that furthered deputy Prime Minister of Iraq to attack the leaders of the Arab nation? [when] the Arab rulers have exerted relentless efforts to alleviate burdens of the Iraqi people[?]? The Asharq al-Awsat editorial also reminds readers that ?many parties in Washington called for striking Iraq and removing the regime? Iraq?s traditional allies didn?t denounce those parties but a defense did come from Saudi Arabia?? Yet Iraq did not let Saudi Arabia?s defense influence its hostility, according to the editorial, ?Taha Yassin Ramadan, Iraq?s No.2 in power... attacked the Saudis. His statements in that TV interview surprised many observers, but not those who are familiar with the Iraqi regime and its policies.?
Another Egyptian editorial, in the al-Gumhouria newspaper, says that ?it looks rather strange that while Iraq forwards the summit proposal, Tarek Aziz, deputy Prime Minister of Iraq, attacks, in such a low expression, all Arab rulers, terming them as cowards who are afraid of Israel?? The al-Gumhouria accuses that ?the practices of Tarek Aziz against Arab countries, rulers, and peoples, did not stop. He indulged in several threats about re-annexing Kuwait? Iraq, according to him, is regaining its land, and doesn't seize the lands of others.? The Iraqi attacks on fellow Arab states leads the al-Gumhouria to conclude that ?the Palestinian cause does not trouble you at all, and Al-Aqsa Mosque doesn't concern you in the least.?
What, after all of this criticism, is the Arab motivation to attempt, nonetheless, to ward off a US attack on Iraq? The al-Masaa newspaper of Egypt provides an answer: ?It seems that US wants to hit Iraq for the sake of Israel.? That is, apparently, reason enough to object.
An editorial from the London-based Asharq al-Awsat is the most stridently anti-Saddam. The editorial answers the question posed in its title, ?Who will cry for Saddam??, by saying ?There is nobody who would shed a single tear if Saddam were removed from power. The fear is that Saddam will not be removed and so the tragedy will continue on into the unforeseeable future.? The Asharq al-Awsat editorial claims that ?there is general agreement in the Arab world that if the removal of the Iraqi regime would end the crises in the region, it would be better done sooner rather than later.? Iraq is, simply put, ?incapable of changing its bad attitude or respecting the minimum level of relations with others? it can?t change its attitude in support of terrorism? will not cease threatening its neighbors, as is evidenced by the rocket strikes on Kuwait a few days before Sept. 11??
The Egyptian al-Akhbar newspaper asks, exasperated, ?What is the motive that furthered deputy Prime Minister of Iraq to attack the leaders of the Arab nation? [when] the Arab rulers have exerted relentless efforts to alleviate burdens of the Iraqi people[?]? The Asharq al-Awsat editorial also reminds readers that ?many parties in Washington called for striking Iraq and removing the regime? Iraq?s traditional allies didn?t denounce those parties but a defense did come from Saudi Arabia?? Yet Iraq did not let Saudi Arabia?s defense influence its hostility, according to the editorial, ?Taha Yassin Ramadan, Iraq?s No.2 in power... attacked the Saudis. His statements in that TV interview surprised many observers, but not those who are familiar with the Iraqi regime and its policies.?
Another Egyptian editorial, in the al-Gumhouria newspaper, says that ?it looks rather strange that while Iraq forwards the summit proposal, Tarek Aziz, deputy Prime Minister of Iraq, attacks, in such a low expression, all Arab rulers, terming them as cowards who are afraid of Israel?? The al-Gumhouria accuses that ?the practices of Tarek Aziz against Arab countries, rulers, and peoples, did not stop. He indulged in several threats about re-annexing Kuwait? Iraq, according to him, is regaining its land, and doesn't seize the lands of others.? The Iraqi attacks on fellow Arab states leads the al-Gumhouria to conclude that ?the Palestinian cause does not trouble you at all, and Al-Aqsa Mosque doesn't concern you in the least.?
What, after all of this criticism, is the Arab motivation to attempt, nonetheless, to ward off a US attack on Iraq? The al-Masaa newspaper of Egypt provides an answer: ?It seems that US wants to hit Iraq for the sake of Israel.? That is, apparently, reason enough to object.