A regularly updated roundup of commentary from Arab newspapers.
Iraq needs Arab help
Al Ghad on October 18 said that Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa's visit to Baghdad that day, with an Arab initiative to help save Iraq, was long overdue.
Jordan's privately owned, independent daily criticized the 22-member organization for not having moved until almost two-and-a-half years after the US invasion of Iraq, 10 months after the first legislative elections and a few days after Iraqis voted on their new constitution.
The paper said, however, that Iraq still needed the support of "its Arab depth ... starting with intensive efforts to retrieve the credibility in the Arab system the Iraqis have lost; and this needs practical steps the Iraqis can feel".
The daily suggested that with the new Iraqi reality, the Arab League needs to take a different approach than the traditional ones because the country "needs support in the face of terrorism".
Therefore, it said, the Arabs need to adopt a "clear position in condemning those who kill innocent people in Iraq and to offer practical help in eliminating terrorism".
These steps include asking Iraq's neighbors to patrol their borders for the infiltration of terrorists into Iraq, as well as training and arming Iraq's security services, in addition to providing logistic, technical and intelligence support to the country.
"Only then," the paper said, "will the Arabs be helping the Iraqis rebuild their country".
Moussa's mission
As Safir on October 18 said that besides the personal risks Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa was taking by visiting Iraq, he faced bigger risks in meeting with the US and UK authorities in Iraq.
Lebanon's independent daily predicted that Moussa would not be able to find common ground among the country's various sects.
It added that the visit was a de facto recognition of the US and British occupation and that Moussa's task was not welcomed by the Iraqis, adding that his discussions in Baghdad with officials and opposition forces could not include ending the occupation and demanding a timetable for the withdrawal of foreign troops from Iraq.
"He is not likely to be able to discuss the legitimacy of the referendum and elections organized by the Americans and the British," the paper opined.
It insisted that as long as the questions of occupation and unity of Iraq were not on the agenda of discussions, the issue of national reconciliation would put Moussa in a crisis, doubting that he could be a mediator between the Sunnis on the one hand and the Shias and Kurds on the other.
Moussa's mission, it said, was part of the Arab pressure on the Sunnis to accept that the "old Iraq is finished, and the new Iraq will not be born without national reconciliation that is sponsored by Washington and organized by the Arab League as an observer".
Never again in Iraq
Al Hayat on October 18 said that the results of Iraq's referendum would coincide with the start of Saddam Hussein's trial on charges of killing 143 Shias in 1982.
The London-based, Saudi-financed daily said that the new Iraqi constitution was necessary because it was endorsed by the people.
The trial of Saddam and his top aides was also necessary, it commented, not only to bring officials to account for their violations, but also "to understand the motives and reasons that led to such measures to prevent their repetition in the future".
The paper said that there has been criticism in linking the constitution with the behavior of the former regime because the charter establishes the future and is not part of Iraq's history.
It warned that the constitution does not "draw a line between Saddam's dictatorship and the possibility of a new type of dictatorship that may emerge".
Exchanging bullets for ballots
Ash Sharq Al Awsat on October 18 said that while 10 years ago Iraqis were forced to vote yes to renewing Saddam Hussein's presidential term, this year they voted freely.
The London-based, Saudi-owned daily commented that the referendum on the charter succeeded before the final results because of the high voter turnout. It said that the people were voting either way for a "peaceful process and exchanging the language of bullets and violence for a civilized language, which is the ballot box".
The paper added that it was in Iraqi interests for the constitution to be endorsed, but even if that did not happen, it was important to respect the will of the majority.
It said that indications that Sunni areas had voted against the charter was a positive move because the participation of the majority of the population leads the Sunnis to feel secure and encourage them to participate in the next legislative elections at the end of the year.
The Saudi daily said that Iraqis had no other choice but "political, peaceful action and respecting the democratic process".
It added that the experience in the country after the collapse of Saddam's regime has proven that "violence only breeds violence, which has obstructed the rebuilding of the infrastructure and has been the main reason behind the delay in the withdrawal of the occupation forces".
A plan for sedition
Al Quds Al Arabi on October 17 criticized US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for having predetermined the results of the Iraq vote before their final announcement.
The London-based, independent Palestinian-owned daily said that Rice's comments in London showed that the US administration insists on continuing its sponsorship of Iraq's political process and that "all arrangements were taken to endorse the constitution".
It opined that the American government had directed the referendum "with a lot of cleverness by preventing the Iraqi parliament from amending the voting laws to stop the opposition from gaining the two-thirds needed in their Sunni provinces to drop the charter".
The daily said that whether the new constitution was approved or rejected in the referendum, it was a "plan for sedition" in Iraq that would consolidate sectarian divisions.
"It is clear the Iraqis voted on the basis of sectarianism and on loyalty to the sect rather than the homeland," the paper commented, "and this is the most serious factor that threatens the future of the country and pours oil on the fire of violence there".
It went on to say that President Bush had the right to praise the referendum because "what he is trying to impose now in Iraq is what serves the agenda of his administration, and not the national Iraqi agenda".
Food for thought
Al Hayat on October 17 said that statements by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and some European officials on the outcome of the Iraqi vote on the constitution were hasty.
The London-based paper said that Rice "was speaking as if she was announcing the results in advance".
Although the Saudi-financed paper predicted that the official results would not disappoint Rice, it said that they would provide food for thought regarding the future.
The paper said that although the vote outcome will endorse the constitution, initial results showing that at least three predominantly Sunni provinces had voted against the charter meant that there was a need for national reconciliation to ensure the sound future of the country.
It added that it had hoped that national reconciliation would have been addressed during the drafting of the document and that the charter would be a unifying factor, "but instead, it acts to divide more than unify".
The fate of the entire region
Al Watan on October 17 said that the result of the Iraqi vote was obvious due to its drafting amid deep sectarian divisions that have benefited the US occupation. The Qatari paper predicted a new "cycle of struggles".
The pro-government daily said that the referendum was a political act that determines the free choice of the people, "but only if it is held in freedom, equality and national unity". But when the vote is held in a country that is occupied, the process and its direction will be suspicious, it argued.
The paper said that "the big fear is that the phase after the referendum will lead to further decline because the draft constitution is booby-trapped and can be exploited by any party to consolidate the trends of secession based on sectarianism".
It warned that the atmosphere was ripe for the fragmentation of Iraq, and that with the endorsement of such a constitution, its division might become legitimate.
It said that the "fate of Iraq is not its own, but the fate of the entire region".
The need for a flexible constitution
Al Ahram on October 17 was more optimistic on the Iraqi vote, saying that the referendum was an important development for Iraq's future and an entry to begin resolving its crisis.
Egypt's semi-official, mass-circulation paper's editorial added that resolving the country's problems, however, required the cooperation of all Iraqi society in treating "this flexible constitution" as a document that can be reviewed in a way that will achieve the unity of the country and its people.
It urged Iraqis to look at the charter as necessary to achieve their unity and progress, "not as achieving the demands of one sector's interests over another".
The Egyptian daily said that it was also necessary for the US-led forces in Iraq to give a timetable for their withdrawal and hand over all sovereignty and power to the Iraqi people.
It argued that the continued presence of the foreign forces in the country, "even with the endorsement of the new constitution, will maintain the dangerous political and security implications of the crisis".
Review of Arab editorials
TOOLBAR
To add a comment,
Please log in:
Don't have an account?
Register now to comment on stories and stay up to date on important events and issues in the Middle East with our newsletter.