And the Arab media is convinced that the US Administration is, essentially, in Sharon’s pocket.
A columnist for al-Anwar, a Beirut newspaper, put it colorfully, writing that Ariel Sharon was like an eraser, rubbing out any impressions left in Washington by Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen). The columnist, Rafik Khouri, noted, “Before Sharon’s visit, George W. Bush described Israel’s separation wall as a snake. But now Bush has given instructions to merely limit the effect of the snake’s poison and decrease the wall’s damage to the lives of ordinary Palestinians.” Jerusalem’s al-Quds newspaper sees in the US change of position regarding the separation wall as a sign that any final Palestinian state will be “surrounded by Jewish settlements and besieged by separation walls and barbed wire.”
In contrast, Abdulwahab Badrakhan wrote in London’s al-Hayat that, in fact, President Bush did not change his position on Israel’s separation fence. “Of course he did not change his position,” Badrakhan wrote, “because he always supported it, as long as the war criminal Ariel Sharon tells him that the wall was built for security reasons - that is to combat terror. As soon as Bush hears the expression ‘terror’, he reacts automatically - as in the Pavlov experiment - and he becomes blind....” President Bush also “didn't change his position... on the issue of the Palestinian prisoners-hostages,” according to the columnist, “He supports their continued detention, and consequently supports the blackmail that Sharon and Mofaz are practicing in return for Palestinian concessions.” While acknowledging that Bush publicly supports Palestinian statehood, Badrakhan writes, “[Bush] views the Palestinian people's aspirations as a security game, which the Israelis have created and succeeded in implanting in his head.” Beirut’s As-Safir newspaper concurs with the al-Hayat columnist: “Sharon has brought the security issue back to the forefront and has destroyed any mention of Israeli occupation of Palestinian land. But what is more amazing is that Bush went along with him and still views Sharon as a man of peace.”
Summarizing Arab opinion on the recent American statements, the Saudi Arabian Arab News (in English) declared: “The White House had better really mean it.... We have to hope that it is not yet another case of the Americans protesting loudly while privately letting the Israelis know that they can press on with their oppressive policies without fear of genuine challenge.”
As for the contrast between the Abbas and Sharon visits, an as-Safir writer comments, “Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas thought Bush would listen to his demands. In fact, Abbas thought for a while that he had succeeded. But he soon found out there was a problem: He was expected, by the Israelis and Americans, to be a means to guarantee Israel’s security for the occupation forces.”
One of the reasons for the Bush Administration’s perceived sympathy to Israeli concerns, according to the Beirut newspaper, is the upcoming American elections. “Karl Rove... has decided to put together a winning combination for Bush’s reelection. He believes that the radical Christians on Capitol Hill, who are known for their allegiance to Bush, should remain faithful to the president. And what’s more important is for Bush to take certain measures to garner the Jewish vote. Therefore, it is important for the president to maintain his good relations with Sharon.”
London’s al-Hayat sees the Israeli successes in Washington as signs of “the legendary weakness of Arab diplomacy. What we are witnessing for the thousandth time is the scenario of Israel's lies and deceptiveness laid out to an American president who is fully prepared to believe everything, because all he thinks about is the Jewish money and votes he will need in his forthcoming elections campaign.”
The Al-Anwar article concludes its review of Sharon’s visit to Washington thus: “The only thing Sharon has not yet erased is stage three of the ‘road map’, which calls for establishing a Palestinian state. But have no fear, [Sharon] is working hard on that, too.” And the al-Hayat columnist writes: “In the end, that ‘map’ was created to silence the Palestinians.”
A columnist for al-Anwar, a Beirut newspaper, put it colorfully, writing that Ariel Sharon was like an eraser, rubbing out any impressions left in Washington by Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen). The columnist, Rafik Khouri, noted, “Before Sharon’s visit, George W. Bush described Israel’s separation wall as a snake. But now Bush has given instructions to merely limit the effect of the snake’s poison and decrease the wall’s damage to the lives of ordinary Palestinians.” Jerusalem’s al-Quds newspaper sees in the US change of position regarding the separation wall as a sign that any final Palestinian state will be “surrounded by Jewish settlements and besieged by separation walls and barbed wire.”
In contrast, Abdulwahab Badrakhan wrote in London’s al-Hayat that, in fact, President Bush did not change his position on Israel’s separation fence. “Of course he did not change his position,” Badrakhan wrote, “because he always supported it, as long as the war criminal Ariel Sharon tells him that the wall was built for security reasons - that is to combat terror. As soon as Bush hears the expression ‘terror’, he reacts automatically - as in the Pavlov experiment - and he becomes blind....” President Bush also “didn't change his position... on the issue of the Palestinian prisoners-hostages,” according to the columnist, “He supports their continued detention, and consequently supports the blackmail that Sharon and Mofaz are practicing in return for Palestinian concessions.” While acknowledging that Bush publicly supports Palestinian statehood, Badrakhan writes, “[Bush] views the Palestinian people's aspirations as a security game, which the Israelis have created and succeeded in implanting in his head.” Beirut’s As-Safir newspaper concurs with the al-Hayat columnist: “Sharon has brought the security issue back to the forefront and has destroyed any mention of Israeli occupation of Palestinian land. But what is more amazing is that Bush went along with him and still views Sharon as a man of peace.”
Summarizing Arab opinion on the recent American statements, the Saudi Arabian Arab News (in English) declared: “The White House had better really mean it.... We have to hope that it is not yet another case of the Americans protesting loudly while privately letting the Israelis know that they can press on with their oppressive policies without fear of genuine challenge.”
As for the contrast between the Abbas and Sharon visits, an as-Safir writer comments, “Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas thought Bush would listen to his demands. In fact, Abbas thought for a while that he had succeeded. But he soon found out there was a problem: He was expected, by the Israelis and Americans, to be a means to guarantee Israel’s security for the occupation forces.”
One of the reasons for the Bush Administration’s perceived sympathy to Israeli concerns, according to the Beirut newspaper, is the upcoming American elections. “Karl Rove... has decided to put together a winning combination for Bush’s reelection. He believes that the radical Christians on Capitol Hill, who are known for their allegiance to Bush, should remain faithful to the president. And what’s more important is for Bush to take certain measures to garner the Jewish vote. Therefore, it is important for the president to maintain his good relations with Sharon.”
London’s al-Hayat sees the Israeli successes in Washington as signs of “the legendary weakness of Arab diplomacy. What we are witnessing for the thousandth time is the scenario of Israel's lies and deceptiveness laid out to an American president who is fully prepared to believe everything, because all he thinks about is the Jewish money and votes he will need in his forthcoming elections campaign.”
The Al-Anwar article concludes its review of Sharon’s visit to Washington thus: “The only thing Sharon has not yet erased is stage three of the ‘road map’, which calls for establishing a Palestinian state. But have no fear, [Sharon] is working hard on that, too.” And the al-Hayat columnist writes: “In the end, that ‘map’ was created to silence the Palestinians.”