April 2, 2002 MIDEAST: U.S. ON 'SIDELINES' AS VIOLENCE RAGES

April 2, 2002

MIDEAST: U.S. ON 'SIDELINES' AS VIOLENCE RAGES

KEY FINDINGS

** Israeli papers agree that Arafat has not kept his promise to fight terror attacks

** Israeli writers, left and center, support IDF deployment, but not as a prelude to reoccupation

** Arabs blast Bush for admonishing Arafat, while giving "green light" to Israeli "terror"

** Arabs see Sharon using global war on terrorism as pretext to target Palestinians

** Euro/Canadian papers voice near universal condemnation of Sharon's "iron fist" approach

** Western observers find U.S. stance "confusing," urge administration to intensify engagement

REGIONAL THEMES

ISRAEL: Editorials castigated Chairman Arafat for having done "nothing to prevent the wave of terror attacks." Even Peace Camp stalwart Amos Oz blasted Arafat for countenancing the tactics of "fanatical Islam." The conservative Jerusalem Post expressed disbelief that the U.S. still considers him the Palestinians' legitimate leader. While all writers supported stepped-up IDF activities in the West Bank, critics from the left and center warned that they weren't in favor of reoccupying the territories. Nationalist writers, conversely, championed "reconquering" the territories to purge them of terrorists and to restore Israel's "deterrent capability."

ARABS: Media across the Arab world were incensed that President Bush has placed the blame for the continuing violence on Chairman Arafat, while "ignoring the Israeli military raids." They consistently portrayed the administration as having given PM Sharon the "green light" to carry out his policy of "brutality" in the occupied territories. The consensus held that in putting the onus on Arafat, instead of Sharon, to end the violence, the U.S. was out of step with the international community. The result, many warned, will be even more hatred of U.S. policies. Some writers claimed that Sharon has commandeered the U.S.' war against terrorism to target the PA.

EUROPE/CANADA: With the exception of conservative London and Ottawa dailies which defended Israel's acting in self-defense, editorialists were harshly critical of Sharon's blunt force tactics, arguing that the conflict cannot be solved by military means. A few lamented the ineffectiveness of the EU, but nearly all reserved their strongest rebukes for the U.S. Some even blamed Washington's "hitherto limp diplomatic efforts" and its perceived tilt toward Israel for the "highly explosive situation." Many were particularly dismayed by recent "contradictory signals" from the U.S. administration: its UN vote calling for Israeli withdrawal even as Bush "expressed support for Sharon." This, at a point when "unambiguous" U.S. action is needed. Criticism aside, writers across the board implored the U.S. to intensify its engagement.

EDITORS: Gail Hamer Burke, Katherine Starr, Stephen Thibeault

EDITORS' NOTE: This report is based on 95 reports from 35 countries, March 29 - April 2. Editorial excerpts from each country are listed from the most recent date.

MIDDLE EAST

ISRAEL: "Retribution"

Efrayim Ganor wrote in independent, Russian-language Novosti Nedeli (4/2): "Palestinians believed up till now that they would get away with anything, but it is now beginning to dawn on them: They will have to pay a price for the bloody orgy of terror. Arafat is used to traveling on a one-way street, where we alone sustain losses. We lost 400 Israelis during 18 months, and the Israeli economy is on the brink of collapse, but the Palestinians are still reaping political dividends by playing the role of victims. It should be hoped all that is over now. We have finally declared war on terrorism and, if we do not stop in midway, we will emerge victorious from this battle. We need to have patience, however: We are still at the very beginning of the road. The struggle against terrorism will take time. We may suffer more losses. A la guerre comme a la guerre. The only inspiring thing in this nightmarish situation is the realization that the IDF is on the right path and is not about to change course. Thank God, our authorities have finally decided to opt for the right goal. Our task is to oust, depose, and liquidate the Palestinian leadership, to suppress the Palestinian terrorist organizations. This is a painstaking and a tough job. The IDF has to cleanse Arafat-controlled territories of terrorists. To do so, we will have to occupy them completely, searching every house and every corner."

"Fight All The Way To Victory"

Shlomo Groman commented in Vesti, an independent Russian-language daily belonging to the Yedi'ot Aharonot group (4/2): "Israel's true enemy is that segment of Arab nations that pursues the goal of expelling Jews from their historical homeland. Therefore, we have to end hostile Arab presence in the Land of Israel. Arabs have to be resettled in the 21 Arab states that have more than sufficient room for all.... Israel should fight this war to the end; it must not settle for a half-done job. Only that way will we achieve stable peace not just 'until the next elections,' but for generations to come."

"Smash The Ritual Of Death"

Editor-in-Chief Amnon Dankner wrote in a page-one article in popular, pluralist Maariv (4/1): "Israelis are told that they must not lower themselves morally and hurt innocents, but if the choice is between our innocents and their innocents, we will have no hesitation in knowing which to choose. The Arabs' dark ritual of death does not discriminate between a peace-seeker and someone who wants to hold on to the territories, between a hawk and a dove, between a radical and a moderate, and all of them must unite today to battle this malignant ritual, defeat it, smash it, crush it. It is not only our enemy. It is the enemy of humanity. Today it arouses the Arab street, tomorrow it will cause this street to send new disciples of this ritual to the West, to Europe and to the United States. It did not end with the Twin Towers. Today Israel faces many in the West, who shortsightedly, hypocritically and stupidly condemn her. Tomorrow they will thank her."

"The Obligation To Ask"

Liberal op-ed writer Yael Paz-Melamed observed in popular, pluralist Maariv's lead editorial (4/1): "If the goal is to hunt down Arafat and to make him kneel and ask for a cease-fire, why were 20,000 soldiers called up? Regular units would have sufficed. If the [GOI's] intention is to conquer expansive tracts of land and to remain there, it should say it plainly, at least to the Cabinet Ministers, so that they can reconsider their vote. The public can't be told that Israel intends to topple the terror infrastructure, and, under the auspices of that all-encompassing statement, fulfill the [Israeli Right's] dream of reoccupying the territories."

"Sharon Against Time"

Senior columnist Nahum Barnea wrote in a page one article in independent Ha'aretz (4/1): "After dozens of years of wars of this sort Israelis know that every headquarters that is destroyed will be rebuilt, and every suicide bomber handler who is arrested will leave behind him a new handler. Nevertheless, it is a justified and essential operation. If the U.S. went all the way to Afghanistan to eradicate a terrorist infrastructure, Israel certainly is entitled to go all the way to Qalqilya. The IDF's principal enemy in this war is not the armed Palestinian men but time.... Sharon knows that he is living on borrowed time. He appears to believe that he is going to receive ten days from the Americans. That is what Israel has, and that too will be cut short if a tank shell should happen to hit a school by accident.... [What's more] the longer the circus around Arafat¡¦s siege in Ramallah continues, the shorter the IDF's timetable in the other Palestinian cities becomes. It is very tempting to say to Sharon: ... 'Kick his butt, finish him off, expel him. Don't moan to us about how you made a mistake when you didn¡¦t kill him in 1982'.... But Sharon is no sucker. Instead of making a decision and standing behind it he prefers to reach Arafat by means of zigzagging. If he is successful, the glory will be his. But should he fail, the blame will be the IDF's, which screwed up, the Americans', who pressed, and the media's, which stabbed him in the back. Israel is chock-full of guilty folks, but it's fresh out of responsible ones."

"There Are Two Wars Here"

Prominent Peace Camp novelist Amos Oz wrote in mass-circulation, pluralist Yediot Aharonot (4/1): "There are two wars here. The one is the Palestinian people's war for its right to free itself from occupation and to establish an independent state. Every decent person should support that cause. The other war is the war of fanatical Islam, from Iran to Gaza and from Lebanon to Qalqilya, to annihilate Israel and to uproot the Jewish people from its homeland. That is a criminal war that every decent person should despise. The bewilderment, confusion and simplification that grips Israel and the world stems from the fact that Yasser Arafat and his men are waging these two wars as if they were one and the same, they are waging them concurrently. The suicide-murderers apparently do not distinguish between these two wars. And even decent people who aspire to peace and justice, in Israel and the world at large, are duped.... There are some who cling to the argument that the Palestinians are merely the victims of a foreign occupying force, and therefore they are entitled to kill their oppressors--and there are others who cling to the no-less simplistic argument that Israelis are a target for an Islamic annihilation campaign, and therefore Israel is entitled to oppress the killers.... Should the end of the occupation fail to bring us peace--at least Israel will have, instead of two wars, only one war: not a war about 'our sole right to the Land of Israel' but rather a war of our right to live as a free people in our country. A just war, a war of no-choice, for life and our home.... And we will win that war, as is nearly always the case nearly everywhere when those who fight are fighting only for their homes, their liberty and their very lives."

"A Promising Start"

Nationalist Hatzofe declared (4/1): "Belatedly and hesitatingly, the government seems to be moving in the right direction. Slowly, indecisively, to say nothing of the zany presence of foreign minister, the government is doing the right thing. Maybe the prime minister is waking up. We have been writing for over 18 months...that in the end, Israel will have no choice but to reconquer all the Judaea, Samaria, and Gaza Strip territories so as to purge them of terrorists and of the enormous stockpiles of weapons. It's an unpleasant, an inconvenient task, and we would have preferred to enjoy pleasant peace and to participate in ceremonies on White House lawns. It will not be an easy war.... but it will be a start. The volume of bloodshed will be drastically reduced, and what's more important, Israel will regain the most crucial quality it had lost--its deterrent capability. The deterrent capability was the factor that prevented terrorist attacks during decades, and it was because we had it that Israelis were able to safely visit Palestinian cities until a few years ago."

"End Arafat's Rule"

The conservative, independent Jerusalem Post editorialized (3/31): "Arafat's PA has become a hotbed of terrorism that makes Afghanistan under the Taliban look tame. There is no sign whatsoever that Arafat is willing to lift a finger to bring terrorism under control, let alone crush terror organizations and forswear terrorism forever. Yet the main worry of the international community, including, on its face, the United States, is that Arafat's rule be preserved for another day. The shoe that is waiting to fall, in both Washington and Jerusalem, is whether either or both are willing to part with Arafat as leader of the Palestinian people. As long as either capital continues to consider Arafat as indispensable and is unwilling to end his leadership role, the current crisis will continue to escalate. The way to end this crisis, by contrast, is for Israel and the United States to agree that Arafat must be made to flee his current redoubt much as he fled Jordan and Lebanon, but this time never to return."

"Force Is Not Enough"

Independent Ha'aretz editorialized (3/31): "Israel showed restraint when faced with a series of lethal Palestinian terrorist attacks and accepted the memorandum which Zinni proposed for the achievement of a cease-fire. The intransigent side was the Palestinian Authority: Arafat did nothing to prevent the wave of terror attacks (and in this way made it clear to the PA leadership and the Palestinian public that the attacks were to his liking) and rejected Zinni's proposals.... Faced with Palestinian terrorism, Israel feels it must bring to bear its military power in order to minimize the violent element that Arafat has incorporated in his maneuvering over the cease-fire. Nonetheless, one cannot ignore the limited value inherent in a military operation: it will not end the confrontation and will not destroy terrorism. Furthermore, the use of military force, however linked with a specific point in time, cannot stand on its own; it must be part of a strategic concept.... The Government has once more awakened concerns that in its struggle against the P.A., it is not honestly offering a hand of peace but is aiming to achieve the opposite: to continue and perpetuate the hold over the territories. It is not too late to counter this suspicion and initiate a dialogue with the Arab world on the basis of the conclusions reached at the summit in Beirut."

"A New Arab Vision Of The 'Day After'"

Senior Middle East affairs analyst Zvi Bar'el wrote in independent Ha'aretz (3/31): "The Palestinian Authority, whose representatives were forced to demonstrate anger over the neglect of their leader, found itself cut off from the agenda of the summit meeting. It was not only that the attitude displayed toward Arafat painted him as the leader of an underground whose name was best left unmentioned, but also the fact that the content of the summit was decided over his head.... Henceforth a new hegemony exists for dealing with the Arab-Israeli conflict and it is not in Arafat's hands. He can no longer offer Israel the asset he thought he possessed: entry into the Arab club.... To judge by the determination displayed by the Saudis, the summit resolutions will not be buried in a drawer in Beirut.... The Saudi initiative, which in Beirut became the Arab initiative, presents the prospect of the 'day after' in a way that has never before been done by any Arab forum. The main clauses of the text referring to the Arab-Israeli conflict are couched in almost businesslike terms, free of ideological rhetoric, and they lay down the practical platform for bringing about the end of the conflict. That is the dilemma the Saudis--by speaking directly to the Israelis and not to the Prime Minister--have posited for the Israeli public, which will have to decide, after the war against Arafat and after the reprisal operations, which way to turn."

WEST BANK: Palestinian Media Note

This media reaction features only Jerusalem-based Al-Quds. The other two dailies, semi-official Al-Hayat Al-Jadida and pro-Palestinian Authority Al-Ayyam, have not been published since the Israeli military operations started in Ramallah three days ago. Voice of Palestine radio and other independent radio and TV stations in the city were also closed down by Israeli forces.

"Bush Administration Embraces Israeli Position"

Independent Al-Quds opined (4/2): "It is really impossible to understand the American logic, expressed by President George W. Bush in the remarks he made last night, in which he echoed the Israeli position, if not surpassed it. President Bush has placed the blame of the continuing violence in the Palestinian territories and Israel on President Arafat, ignoring the Israeli military raids on Ramallah, El-Bireh and many other Palestinian towns. He also disregarded the negative psychological impact the Israeli killings and destruction have caused to the Palestinian people. The most illogical part of President Bush's remarks, however, had to do with the ability of Arafat to direct the Palestinian affairs or control them, especially as he remains besieged in his office with no water, electricity or phone communication.... If anything, the president's remarks proved, once and for all, that the Bush administration has totally embraced the Israeli government position.... The American bias, expressed by President Bush, will not help in ending the escalation in violence between the two sides. The situation would have probably been much better had the president identified the occupation and settlements as the reason behind the accumulated Palestinian frustration and condemned them the same way he condemned the reciprocal violence."

"U.S. Statements On Mideast Unrealistic"

Azzam Abu Saud commented in independent Al-Quds (4/1): "Every time I hear a statement by a U.S. government official at any level about the Middle East, I feel that these people must be living in a different world, away from any realism or common sense. The official American statements released in the last two days, which are exactly restating previous positions, are nothing more than a joke. Such statements are made by people who sound more like programmed robots, who see things only from one narrow angle and state repetitive and fixed positions, even if such statements are out-of-date and place. As an example, the American constant demand from President Arafat to stop violence, or what they call as the Palestinian terrorism, is still being repeated by U.S. officials as if Arafat was a sort of a skillful magician... It is really hard to understand such an American stance, which asks Arafat to stop the violence and accept the occupation on his land, his people and his office. How can Arafat stop the violence after they take away his men and cut off water, electricity, food and all communications from his office?"

"Implementing Security Council Resolution"

Independent Al-Quds editorialized (3/31): "Israel continues its comprehensive aggression against the Palestinian territories. After raiding Ramallah and Al-Bireh and destroying the buildings surrounding President Arafat's office, Israeli tanks entered Beit Jala and Hebron in an effort, according to many observers, to reoccupy all Palestinian cities, arresting thousands of Palestinians for resisting the Israeli occupation and destroying the Palestinian infrastructure, in addition to killing innocent civilians. It is not a coincidence that the UN Security Council passed a resolution calling for a cease-fire and demanding from Israel to withdraw its forces from Palestinian cities, including Ramallah. However, in a clear defiance to the Security Council, an Israeli official source state that Israel 'has more important things to worry about than a Security Council decision.' Thus the international community should resolve itself to decide on an effective and immediate mechanism to implement that resolution."

EGYPT: "Who Stops The Brutal Aggression On The Palestinian People?"

Leading pro-government Al Ahram's editor-in-chief Ibrahim Nafie held (4/2): "The Israeli army continued its brutal aggression on the Palestinian people amidst the silence, if not the support, of the American administration which granted war criminal and terrorist Sharon a 'green light' for the annihilation of the Palestinian people.... Palestinians are fighting to liberate their national land according to the international pacts, including the UN Charter...to which the United States is party.... Should we remind the international community, especially the United States...of the fuss they raised about human rights in the Balkans...Yugoslavia...and East Timor?... The Arab man on the street regards the superpowers as applying international laws selectively according to their own interests and pushing Arab public to pressure their governments to adopt different positions now."

"Sharon's New Scenario"

Leading pro-government Al Ahram's columnist Salama Ahmed Salama predicted (4/2): "The expected scenario of the Israeli-American alliance now is that Sharon will expand violent military operations...and probably expel Arafat, without harming his life, to Egypt or Jordan, and arrest Palestinian activists.... He will be instigated to strike at Hizbullah and threaten Syria. Hizbullah is on the American terrorist list, and is thus a legitimate target for both Sharon and America. Then the opportunity will be given to Bush to strike at Iraq under the pretext of destroying weapons of mass destruction under what he calls the war against terrorism. But also, he seeks to implement a secret plan to re-arrange the region. The coming days are certainly full of hardships and surprises."

"Will Extremism Win?"

Leading pro-government Al Ahram's columnist Abdel Atti Mohamed warned (4/2): "Arab and American parties agree peace is the only option for the region.... But, Sharon's brutality accompanied by U.S. silence means the U.S. is saying one thing and acting another way.... Arab public opinion asks: if the American Administration is truly worried about he grave consequences of this situation, it certainly realizes these consequences, and is not acting to prevent them. Moderates and peace supporters can no longer answer those who are igniting the situation and encouraging hate toward American policy, placing the Israeli and American positions in one basket, given the current tragic situation.... The winners in all this are these extremist supporters. This is the message that Washington should know."

"Egyptian Worries"

Opposition Al Wafd's editor-in-chief Abbas Al Tarabily lamented (4/2): "The chance for Israel to live in peace with all Arabs in the Middle East is lost. The chance for Jews to come out of their kibbutz to mingle in the Arab world is lost.... From now on, no Arab will trust anything Jewish and will welcome none after [Arabs] have become certain of their treachery and certain too that normalization has been nothing but a fragile bond [against Arabs]...for thuggery and power. The barrier of hatred has grown even higher."

"Despite Condemnation Sharon Continues His Biggest Mission"

Sana Fu'ad commented on government-run Arab Republic of Egypt Radio General Service (4/1): "While the civilized world watches, Israel plans to reoccupy the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, impose military rule on them and destroy the remaining infrastructure of the Palestinian National Authority with the purpose of forming new Palestinian authorities which agree to rule under an endless Israeli occupation.... The question here is: What is everybody waiting for? Ariel Sharon's goals have now become quite clear. The most notorious Israeli terrorist is pursuing those goals undeterred by anybody or anything at all. Sharon aims at imposing Israeli military domination on all Palestinian self-rule areas, expelling the Palestinian people out of them and turning all signed international and bilateral agreements pertaining to the Palestinian problems into worthless memories."

"Facts"

Pro-government Al Ahram¡¦s editor-in-chief Ibrahim Nafie opined (3/31): ¡¦It is not acceptable to Arabs that Washington always expresses its 'understanding' for Israeli logic in attacking what remains of Palestine and evicting her people from their country in the name of self-defense.... What was contained in Powell¡¦s announcements in the wake of Sharon¡¦s crimes in Ramallah reveals that the American administration ignores everything Arabs proposed at the Beirut Summit. U.S. agreement with yesterday's UN Security Council resolution is not enough.¡¦

"And What Of Israel¡¦s Nazism?"

Pro-government, aggressive Al Akhbar editor-in-chief Galal Dowidar declared (3/31): "Unfortunately Powell concentrated his unfair attack on the martyrdom operations alone calling them acts of terror without having the courage to even hint to the brutal barbaric dealings of Israeli occupation and how it leads to desperation and suicidal operations.¡¦

"Banned"

Columnist Magdy Mehana wrote liberal, opposition Al Wafd (3/31): ¡¦In the end Powell spoke condemning Palestinian resistance and calling what Israel had done a self-defense operation.... Zinni remained in the region to see the will of the Palestinian people broken. Despite this Maher said Bush did not give Sharon a 'green light.' The option for Arabs is armed resistance. The United States now is not fit to be arbitrator because she is not fair.¡¦

JORDAN: "Barking Up The Wrong Tree"

The centrist, influential among-the-elite, English-language Jordan Times opined (4/1): ¡¦The United States has let its colonialist minion loose. President George W. Bush dismissed all the signs of alarm that have continued to emanate from the Middle East, warning that were sounded at the outset of his presidency. The United States has deserted its role as the key sponsor of the peace process. For tactical reasons not befitting the world¡¦s superpower, Washington sanctioned Sharon¡¦s agenda of war on the region. Even as the Israeli prime minister drove the last nail in the coffin of the peace process over the past few days, the United States held fast to its complete bias towards Israel¡¦ In shocking disregard for the feelings of millions of Arabs, Bush blamed the victims¡¦ Bush is barking up the wrong tree. If he is genuinely interested in ending the bloodshed in Palestine and Israel, he needs to direct his words and efforts towards Israel.¡¦

"Facing Israel Tyranny"

Columnist Rakan Majali wrote on the back page of center-left, influential Al-Dustour (4/1): ¡¦PM Sharon convinced himself that, by random killings and vengeful destructions, he can shut up the voice of the Palestinian people, can put out the fire of the Intifada, and can terrorize the Palestinian people into submission and into giving up their right and their self defense. He probably still does not realize the gravity of those illusions and the fact that he leading Israeli towards destruction. He madness, his arrogance and his aggressiveness are only creating enormous energies among the Palestinian people.¡¦

"Who Is Besieging Whom?"

Jamil Nimri commented on the back page of independent, mass-appeal Al-Arab Al-Yawm (3/31): ¡¦Of course Arafat will not succumb and will not sign anything. His performance was great. Besieged in a room, he had more presence than any other time. Meanwhile, the destruction and elimination of all aspects of the Palestinian Authority goes on. Arafat¡¦s siege will become the issue. It is a waste of time for the Arabs and the world, and prolongs Sharon¡¦s life in government. Having said that, Sharon is at the end of the rope. He does not have options. He cannot achieve security by a Palestinian signature of surrender, and he cannot eliminate the Palestinian Authority to resolve the conflict. Sharon placed Arafat under siege, but he also placed himself in a dilemma and does not know where he is going from here. It is an irony: Sharon is physically and militarily besieging Arafat, but Arafat is besieging him politically.¡¦

LEBANON: "Anger At America And Israel"

An editorial by Rafiq Khoury in centrist Al-Anwar made this point (4/2): "Sharon's real...aim is to finish off the Palestinian cause.... He is trying to isolate the Palestinian Authority, arrest and kill Palestinian fighters...to give Israel the ability to displace the Palestinians and impose security through occupation.... The real paradox is that the American umbrella is protecting the tanks that are actually shooting on President Bush's 'vision' of peace. Furthermore, Washington has encouraged the Saudi initiative and prompted Arabs to reach a consensus on this initiative. The question is: Is the American vision of peace a lie?"

"Israel's War In Contrast With Arab Peace"

Al-Fadl Chalaq wrote in Hariri-owned Al-Mustaqbal (4/2): "Israel is using its power because it is afraid of the Palestinian people. Obviously, it is not afraid of their military arsenal, but of the Palestinian will to stay in Palestine. The leaders of the Palestinian people have already said that the decision to 'transfer' the Palestinian people to another country cannot be taken by Israel. It is a decision that can only be taken by the Palestinian people--and the Palestinians have already decided to stay in their country either on it or buried in it. There is also another message in Israel's war on the Palestinians. The government of Israel did not even discuss the Arab peace initiative. It asked a bureaucratic servant to comment on it. Israel waited for only a few hours before it launched its war on Palestine. The message is clear: Israel does not want peace with the Palestinians."

"'Official Understanding' Of Nasrallah's Rhetoric, So Far No Opening Of Southern Front"

Arab nationalist As-Safir opined (4/2): "The Lebanese government is facing increasing pressure to activate the southern front.... Informed sources say that the decision to open the southern front against Israel...cannot be taken by a group or a party and should not be taken in anger.... The same sources believe that the Lebanese authorities will tend to stick to the Arab peace initiative--and want to promote the fact that violence will never lead to true peace.... The same sources confirm that there is no official Lebanese tendency to bend to pressure and open the southern front against Israel."

IRAN: "Israeli Offensive 'Directly Linked' To Bush's Remarks"

Official Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran External Service in English declared (4/1): "According to political analysts, what has happened in Ramallah and the war initiated by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon are directly linked to remarks made by U.S. President George Bush on Saturday 30 March on American support for Israel's state terrorism against [the] Palestinian nation. Obviously, the blatant support of Bush for the Zionist crimes in Palestine has encouraged Sharon and made him more impudent in intensifying his terrorist activities against Palestinians."

KUWAIT: "What Comes After Dropping The Fig Leaf?"

Sami Nasser Al-Khalifa wrote in independent Al-Rai Al-Aam (4/1): "All actions undertaken by the American Administration today are in support of the butcher Sharon whom President Bush calls a 'dear friend.' This Administration will not hesitate to offer logistic and military support, in addition to a political cover, to Sharon's massacres against the unarmed Palestinian people."

"Do Something, People!"

Former editor and liberal Saud Al-Samaka declared in independent Al-Qabas (4/1): "Those who call for ending the violence and terror exercised by both parties are indeed encouraging, supporting, and even blessing the crimes undertaken by Sharon's government against humanity. When the criminal and the victim are held equal, logic becomes meaningless. What kind of justice is the European Union and America speaking of when they equate an unarmed people fighting occupation with their bare chests with an organized army that owns the world's most modern weapons."

MOROCCO: "The Political Horror"

A front page editorial by Prime Minister Youssoufi argued in government coalition, French-language Liberation (4/1): "What is unbearable is that during a bloody invasion, a military occupation, the whole world sees the entire reality in its horror and M. Bush, from his Texas ranch, does not see anything. What is unbearable is that only months after the whole world showed solidarity with America after the September 11 tragedy, Bush, on behalf of America, refuses solidarity or even compassion for the Palestinian people who are under permanent terrorist attacks from an occupying army. What is unbearable is that while Arafat is being shelled Bush finds the time to ask Arafat to do more for peace. What is unbearable to see is for the first superpower in the world, a model, cannot find anything to do except offer unconditional support to war and occupation. What is unbearable is to listen to Bush use 'terrorism' in an affair of colonialism and occupation."

QATAR: "We Need Hizbullah Now"

Hassan Al-Mohammady wrote in semi-independent Al-Watan (4/2): "Only one person can rescue Arafat from the Israeli armed forces, and that is Hizballah Secretary General Sheikh Hassan Nassralla. Arafat should not have asked the Arab leaders to help him because they cannot even help themselves. They have lost their pride and dignity. Israel knows only the language of force. What was taken by force should be returned by force. This was Hizballah's slogan and this should be our strategy. If we want to restore our pride and dignity, we should give the Arab leadership to Sheikh Hassan Nasseralla and Hizbullah."

"Suicide Bombs Every Day"

Mazen Hamad vented in semi-independent Al-Watan (4/2): "Sharon, the idiotic psycho, knows where and when to start a massacre against unarmed Palestinians, but he doesn't know how to stop it. As Sharon escalates his aggression against the Palestinians, the martyrs escalate their operations inside Israel. Sharon and the Americans thought that a huge military operation against the Palestinian Authority would pressure Arafat and the Palestinians to accept a humiliating agreement. But what has happened is that all Palestinians have become suicide bombers waiting to explode. Every day, there will be Palestinians willing to launch operations as long as the occupation continues. Sharon will withdraw in the end, but after he stains his hands with Palestinian and Israeli blood."

SAUDI ARABIA: "Humiliating A President"

Moderate Riyadh Daily opined (4/2): "Israel's continuing ill-treatment of Palestinian President Yasser Arafat is simply not acceptable to the Arab world and to most sections of the international community. Despite this, Israel continues to hold Arafat hostage and humiliate him at every turn.... Israel's privileged immunity from international laws and acceptable norms of decency is truly baffling, especially at a time when the world's endurance for human rights violations and terrorism are at the lowest possible level.... Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon needs to be hauled up the Milosevic way if justice does indeed have to be meted out. Israel's persistent Arafat-bashing would only inflame the intifada all the more.... Even now, it is not too late to have an international peacekeeping force in place... Considering Sharon's total disregard for accepted human behavior, it is time that such an international force is rushed in to check any further assaults on the Palestinian leader. The world simply cannot watch as a president is being denigrated as a common crook."

"The Sharoni Nazism"

Dammam-Based, moderate Al-Madina maintained (4/2): "The most accurate description of the current Israeli issue is that it is a new Nazism. The Israeli butcher is not concerned with the latest UN resolution, and not concerned with the Arabic initiative. He is also not concerned with the many condemnations which are being poured on his head by countries worldwide calling for justice, freedom and peace. By such stupid behavior, Sharon is bringing back the memory of old Nazism. This behavior describes his shaky and bloody personality. He is unaware of the alphabet of politics. He is only professional in practicing violence and terrorism. The Israeli moderates are still condemning his adventures and inability to guarantee the security of the people of Israel."

"No Comfort For The Weak"

Jeddah-based, conservative Al-Madina held (4/2): "Israeli Prime Minister Sharon, with the clear agreement of President Bush, has isolated Palestinian President Arafat. The first (Sharon), stresses and the second (Bush), believes that Arafat will be isolated until he is able to put a 100% end to terrorism!... Arafat, who is isolated in a small room without water, food or electricity has to put an end to terrorism and insure the security of Israel?... Sharon, who has 200,000 well-armed soldiers with American weapons, cannot halt the Palestinian suicide bombings and cannot live securely.... This is really an insult to the human mind."

"Bin Laden Is In Ramallah"

London-based, pan-Arab Al-Sharq Al-Awsat editorialized (4/1): "It is not a surprise to hear about young innocent people turning themselves into bombs, especially when the whole Arab world is setting in front of their TV screens watching the Israeli brutality.... The 'real Ramallah movies' of mothers mourning their children, the injured and the dead,...are what generate hatred and create the desire to be martyrs. If Israel thinks that it is pushing the Palestinians to find a replacement for Arafat, then they are definitely wrong. It is his actions that made him the most popular leader.... Israel is creating an atmosphere for future attacks. The hatred and the desire to for revenge that it has built into the minds of young Arabs is more than even bin Laden could do.... The United States and the West have to realize the dangerous result of the Israeli government's deeds."

"More Grief"

Columnist Saeed Al-Ghamdi wrote Abha-based, moderate Al-Watan (4/1): "Every citizen in the Arab world yesterday wished more grief and heartache for President Bush. Following the Zionist's largest terrorism operation thus far against an unarmed people, in an attempt to annihilate an entire nation, Bush, the U.S. president and the descendant of cowboys, appeared on television screens, sad because a suicidal bomb carried by a young woman, took Zionist lives.... This cowboy doesn't feel any torment while watching Palestinian homes demolished and water, electricity and food supplies cut off.... It is a disgraceful act that the United States agreed to support the UNSC's recent resolution. America considers it just ink on paper and, in solidarity with the Zionists, will not implement a single article of it.... It is time for Arab nations to boycott the United States."

TUNISIA: "Scandalous Hypocrisy And Allegiance"

Senior Editor Hajer Jeridi wrote in independent, French-language Le Temps (3/31): "What is the international community waiting for to act effectively and stop Sharon, the Nazi? Is it going to wait until Palestine becomes totally 'zionized' or until Sharon assassinates Arafat? The idea is working in his mind and he won't hesitate to activate it at the appropriate moment. But who are the powers of shadow that hide behind the policy of ethnic cleansing lead by Sharon? Arafat said clearly, 'Sharon could not have acted if he hadn't enjoyed permanent American support and the passive position of other capitals, which are content to barely condemn him.'"

UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: "Washington's Sharonist Policy"

Abu Dhabi-based, pan-Arab Akhbar Al-Arab opined (4/1): "It is not true that the U.S. seeks a just, fair and comprehensive solution of the Arab-Israeli dispute, and also not true that the U.S. is waging a war against terrorism. Anyone who follows the policy of George Bush's government since 9/11 realizes that Washington has abandoned all international laws, principles and norms for one goal: to impose its control on the world and to subject it to its will, voluntarily or by force.... Bush knows that Israel is an occupying force, that it is the only 'axis of evil' in the region, and that Sharon has no political agenda, because he is a great terrorist. By 'understanding' what the Israeli troops do, he does not encourage terrorism but paves the way for a new generation of suicide operators who are willing to sacrifice their lives to liberate their lands and rights and to establish a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital."

EUROPE

BRITAIN: ¡¦Why Europe Must Do More To Stop Israeli Tanks¡¦

Ray Bush, Director of Leeds University Centre for African Studies, wrote this op-ed in liberal Guardian (4/2): "The shame of U.S. inaction in the face of Israeli abuse of Palestinians is legendary. It is all the more galling as it seems that it is only the U.S. that can resolve Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian land and the slaughter on both sides that results from Israel's policy of colonialism. Is it too much to ask the EU to impress on the U.S. that it can no longer wait to hear from the State Department before making its own strategy to bring Sharon to heel?"

"Spare Us From Any More Middle East Peace Plans"

Michael Gove of the conservative Times held (4/2): "The West is losing the War on Terror...for terrorism is winning in the Middle East.... Men who live by violence and feast on weakness are testing the limits of our resolution. They prosecute their claims by force of arms, directed against the innocent in their sights, and solicit international pressure for a 'peace plan' to satisfy their manufactured grievances. The moral logic of self-defence, intuitively grasped across the West after September 11, licenses a nation under such attack to seek out, punish and disable those responsible. But the West today seeks to circumscribe, hedge round or deny morality in Israel's hour of mortal danger and put its faith in the discredited expediency of 'peace plans.' For each of these 'peace plans' rewards terror by ratifying the gains secured by violence and reinforcing the message that the West is too weak to resist aggression. Any 'diplomatic settlement' wrung out of Israel as a consequence of the current terror campaign will only guarantee further terror, for it will have delivered a political yield for an investment in violence, secured a better forward base for the terrorists' stated goals of exterminating Israel, and indicated to tyrants from Baghdad to Damascus that the West was unwilling to hold the line."

"Rarely Has Path To Peace Seemed More Strewn With Obstacles"

According to the independent Economist Global Agenda online (4/1): "Rarely has the path to peace in the Middle East seemed more strewn with obstacles.... The Israelis and the Palestinians seem to be not at a crossroads, as Sharon claims, but at an impasse.... American policy in the region seems to have been overwhelmed by events. Speaking on Saturday, President Bush strongly backed Sharon in the face of the spate of suicide bombing, and said that Arafat 'can do a lot more to prevent attacks.' His only demand on Israel was that it 'makes sure that there is a path to peace as she secures her homeland.' And he strikingly failed to mention America¡¦s backing, earlier in the day, of a UNSC resolution which calls for Israel to pull back its forces in the West Bank. In fact, in his remarks on Saturday Bush seemed to be a returning to the 'hands-off' attitude to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with which he began his administration. That policy of disengagement seemed to be eroding over the past few weeks, as America was reluctantly dragged into a more active role.... Bush¡¦s continued strong backing of Sharon now raises the question of what his intentions are.... Sharon¡¦s strident accusations that Arafat is Israel¡¦s main enemy, and the author of Palestinian terror, seem to indicate that he has no intention of engaging in any further negotiations with him or anyone who explicitly represents him. Is Sharon getting ready to re-occupy Palestinian areas on a permanent basis? Would that bring Israelis the peace and security they so crave?"

FRANCE: "Impotence"

According to left-of-center Liberation (4/2): "The Israeli-Palestinian conflict always holds additional brutalities in store that grab you by the throat and make you furious with impotence. The only side that one can take, the side of peace, is also the only one that seems ruled out: one even has trouble remembering that that path still seemed practicable fewer than two years ago.... The Palestinian terrorist attacks, which aim to kill civilians with the sole goal of killing civilians, are morally indefensible. The riposte by the Israelis, which, well beyond defense needs, aims at humiliating and rendering blood for blood is just as reprehensible.... International public opinion is divided between various firebrands and the impotents. Among the latter...must be counted the United Nations. As for Europe, it only pretends to exist, further and further away, and as a pure loss. The United States, which is the prisoner of its special ties to Israel, is sending pseudo-mediators, who are making fools of themselves and making the country look ridiculous. Despite all its huge superpower, perhaps it must be classified as being among the impotents."

"Bush 'Understands' Sharon"

Patrick Jarreau maintained in left-of-center Le Monde (4/2): "In the Middle East, the Bush administration is registering its most serious diplomatic failure since January 2001.... America's leaders look as though they are frozen between two positions which they have alternately been defending during the past six months."

"Contradictory Signals"

Dominique Bromberger said on government-run France Inter radio (4/2): "The Bush administration...which wants to impose its own system all over the world, is caught in a set of contradictions.... The situation is serious. It's serious for the entire world.... Who can find his way amongst the contradictory signals sent from Washington to the belligerents on the ground?"

"The U.S. Going In Every Direction"

Jean-Christophe Ploquin wrote in Catholic La Croix (4/2): "The U.S. position on the Middle East turned confusing with America's vote at the UN on Sunday.... It is the second time in less than three weeks that the United States has made a gesture to dispel the feeling that Washington is Israel's unconditional supporter. These different positions adopted by the United States seem to underscore divisions at the highest level of the administration."

GERMANY: "A Right To Exist"

Klaus-Dieter Frankenberger noted in a front-page editorial in center-right Frankfurter Allegemeine (4/2): "Even if Sharon is using the legitimization provided by the United States offensive against terrorism and has Arafat isolated physically, the Israeli military offensive will not prevent further suicide bombings. Israel cannot win this war, and could end up even more isolated. Even without considering the suffering of the innocent victims, the political rationale of this venture must be called into question. Israel is already facing the wrath of a distorted, one-sided international community that blames Sharon for the highly explosive situation, while accepting Arafat's sanctimonious, heroic avowals of martyrdom--for which Sharon admittedly is providing the props."

"Die And Let Die"

Peter Muench observed in center-left Sueddeutsche Zeitung of Munich (4/2): "Powerful intervention from the outside is necessary...in order to prevent a large-scale war.... In principle, the international community has already developed a strategy for this kind of scenario: The two warring factions must be separated, and the separation must be safeguarded by a peace force.... The Americans are needed in order to back such an approach. So far, Washington has always sided with Israel, which refuses to make the conflict international. At some point, however, even the United States will have to accept that the refusal to 'internationalize' the conflict has only made things worse."

"U.S. Facing Consequences Of Misguided Middle East Policy"

R. Kuehntopp commented on regional radio station Norddeutscher Rundfunk of Hamburg (3/29): "The United States is now facing the consequences of a completely misguided Middle East policy. The fact that Bush relied only on Sharon and Israel is coming back to haunt him. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has long since begun to threaten the stability of the entire region.... Sharon's strategy appears clear now: After the Netanya bloodbath, he believes that the international community will accept an Israeli strike aimed at toppling Arafat and destroying the Autonomous Palestinian Authority under the cover of an anti-terror war."

ITALY: "An Ambiguous America"

An analysis by Mario Platero in leading business read Il Sole-24 Ore (4/2): "The ambiguity of the United States remains a central factor in the Middle East crisis. Everybody is lamenting that: Europe, the Arab world, the Vatican, even the Hamas spokesman. President Bush yesterday asked Israel to exert moderation, but he approved Sharon's 'self-defense' against terrorism, and, at the same time, he excluded listing Arafat in his 'doctrine' against terrorism.... In sum, this is the classic situation of trying to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds. But nothing is changing in substance. Like Ari Fleischer said, in the end, 'It will be the warring parties that must find a solution'--unless the international commuity, instead of just complaining, manages to help overcome Washington's ambiguity, by recognizing that the complicated, political, economic and diplomatic problems are not a problem just for America, but for the West as a whole."

"Bush's Mistakes And Silence"

A commentary by Sandro Viola in left-leaning, influential La Repubblica said (4/2): "Over the last two weeks, it has been more difficult to 'feel' American. The catastrophe in Palestine, in fact, has made questions about the wisdom of the Bush administration re-emerge.... What appears increasingly evident by the day, in fact, is that it has been America's immobility over the last two months and its decision not to intervene with the necessary strength towards the warring parties that have opened the abyss into which Palestine has fallen."

"The Moral Dilemma"

A front-page analysis by Giannbi Riotta, co-managing editor of centrist, influential La Stampa held (4/2): "What is George Bush's strategic dilemma? To fight his own war on terrorism without ending up becoming involved in the war in the Middle East and being a target, like the Marines in Beirut in 1983. That is why he has given a chance to Sharon. But that will not be enough. Without strong Western military intervention, and a real Wall of Gaza to separate the warring parties, the war will explode."

RUSSIA: "U.S. Less Impressionable Than Europe"

Vladimir Dunayev wrote in reformist Izvestiya (4/2): "Europe and the Arab world sympathize with the Palestinian leader, as it is. His chief goal is to secure America' s support. But Washington, less impressionable than Europe, shows little emotion on receiving news from Ramallah. The Americans are still undecided about 'the chief culprit' in the Middle East. What came first, terrorists or tanks? On the one hand, Israel is a strategic ally. On the other hand, America, fighting a war on terrorism, needs the Arabs' support, if it really wants to see the battle through."

"Concerted Intervention Needed"

Vadim Markushin stated in centrist army Krasnaya Zvezda (4/2): "As push is coming to shove in the Middle East, concerted and massive international intervention is needed to impose a peace formula on the warring factions and make them stop the bloodshed. That is probably what major powers are doing right now."

"Annexation"

Vladimir Dunayev commented on page one of reformist Izvestiya (4/1): "Nobody in the Israeli government uses the word annexation. But this is exactly what is happening.... The Israelis will hardly stay there for a long time--terrorist acts will not stop if they do. Surely, they just want to show what will happen if kamikaze attacks don't cease. Sooner or later, Israel will have to heed the world public opinion. The UN Security Council last Saturday urged the Jewish state to withdraw its troops from the 'territories' and free Yasser Arafat. America did not block the resolution."

"U.S. Unties Israel's Hands"

Under this headline, reformist Vremya Novostei (4/1) front-paged a comment by Aleksandr Timofeyev: "Apparently, Washington...has given its Israeli ally a carte blanche.... Even though the Americans are the main hope in the Middle East, they don't have a peace formula acceptable to both sides. Unwilling to waste their energy and prestige, they have given Sharon a free hand."

AUSTRIA: "War Against Terror"

Foreign editor Livia Klingl commented in mass-circulation Kurier (4/2): "Now Sharon has officially declared it's a war.... According to the man who apparently believes politics equals tanks, Israel is fighting a war against terrorism.... But Israel's actions only make Arafat a 'living martyr' and turn average Palestinians into human bombs. And those Arab countries, which up to now kept something like a 'cold peace' with Israel, are likely to become enemies again as a result of this 'ersatz policy.'"

"Triumph Of Stupidity"

Foreign affairs editor Gudrun Harrer stated in liberal Der Standard (4/1): "Perplexity in Washington; the current situation is also a failure of U.S. diplomacy. For weeks, Zinni tried to get Arafat's agreement to the Tenet/Mitchell Plan, which was adapted to Israel's advantage lately. And in view of the impending attacks, Arafat presented his agreement on a silver platter last Thursday. But no one in Israel wanted it any longer, just as they rejected the Arab League's historic 'Beirut declaration.' Israel's politicians have often derisively commented on how Arafat 'never passes up on an opportunity to pass up on an opportunity.' Apparently, they're making the same mistakes."

BELGIUM: "Reason Against Emotion"

Chief editor Beatrice Delvaux asserted in left-of-center Le Soir (4/2): "A peace process? The hatred and the sufferings on each side jeopardize this possibility.... An intervention from outside? The UN is powerless, Europe does not exist, and the Americans--the only ones who are capable of forcing both sides to return to reason--are divided between their concern to prevent an explosion and their determination to stop terrorist attacks."

"Opening The Eyes"

Foreign editor Gerald Papy editorialized in independent La Libre Belgique (4/2): "Today, the Israeli government's policy is totally blameworthy, with Ariel Sharon flouting UN Resolutions and the Oslo agreement by occupying Palestinian territories. But yesterday's laxness--or even collusion--of the Palestinian Authority for Palestinian terrorist groups is also blameworthy. But in any case, the Palestinian people are henceforth facing an ultra-powerful Israeli State, the United States which almost blindly supports Ariel Sharon, a powerless EU, inefficient Arab countries, and a very weak Palestinian Leader."

"Disinterest Is Morally Unacceptable"

Chief commentator Bart Sturtewagen argued in independent Christian-Democrat De Standaard (4/2): "The fact that Israel is clearly capable of acting as it pleases in the Palestinian territories without any international obstacles is a serious threat for the future. It confirms the Palestinians' belief that they shouldn't expect anything from the international community. What other solution do they have than to bring their struggle to the world forum via attacks and acts of terror?... We are watching with horror and growing unbelief how they make each other's lives impossible. How to balance suffering against suffering and cruelty against cruelty?... The expanding misery makes disinterest morally unacceptable....This tragedy is not taking place far from our place. It may come to one our doorstep any moment."

CROATIA: "Removing Arafat--'Mother Of All Mistakes'"

Zagreb-based, government-owned Vjesnik carried this commentary by Fran Visnar (4/2): "By forcing Arafat to address the world public from the only remaining bathroom, Ariel Sharon wants to humiliate him and show that he doesn't control the situation. However, Sharon must be careful not to kill Arafat, because he knows what would happen after that: destroyed relations with Cairo and Amman, condemnations from Europe and the world, and most important - hundreds of walking suicide bombers who will spread through all Israeli towns on the Mediterranean coast and inland. It will soon become obvious whether Arafat is an indestructible cat. Sharon has proven before to be a man who makes mistakes in strategic assessments, and he has been shown to be someone who cannot beat a weaker opponent with a mighty military force. If he physically hurts Arafat, it would be the 'mother of all mistakes'."

DENMARK: "U.S. Does Appears To Not Know What Leg To Stand On"

Left-wing Information commented (4/2): "Only one country in the world can help Sharon [out of the current situation] and that is the U.S. But the U.S. does not appear to know which leg to stand on. Recently, America voted to support the UN resolution demanding Israel's withdrawal from the occupied territories while, at the same time, expressing support for Sharon. Bush's problem is that Sharon's increasingly violent campaign could make it more difficult to continue the war on terror."

"U.S. Has Given Sharon Free Rein"

Center-right Politiken concluded (3/30): "The United States has given Israel free rein in the region. Sharon's problem appears to be that he does not know what to do with this. There are no winners in this situation. Military power cannot solve the, essentially political, problems of the area."

FINLAND: "U.S. Watches As Violence Escalates"

Leading, independent Helsingin Sanomat's foreign news page column by Washington correspondent Jyri Raivio read (4/2): "The entire U.S. leadership followed, with growing concern, the escalation of violence in the Middle East during Easter weekend. The concern did not translate into new initiatives out of Washington. Even old solutions were slow to be voiced. Secretary Powell had a brief press conference on Good Friday. President Bush said a few words at his Texas ranch and answered some questions on the situation at the White House on Monday. Both reiterated the U.S. position that the U.S. condemns all terrorism regardless of its motives and goals.... Both the President and his Secretary of State voiced strong criticism of Yasser Arafat for not stopping the wave of suicide attacks. President Bush expressed understanding towards Israel."

GREECE: "Paranoia"

The lead editorial in popular, influential and anti-American Eleftherotypia (4/1): "Pushing aside the international outcry and the UN resolution asking for Israel's withdrawal from occupied territories, Sheriff George Bush said that he can understand why Israel is doing what it is doing...Like Bush, Ariel Sharon declared that his country is in total war and that there is no compromise with terrorism, only to justify the impasse of war...The desperate Palestinians know that with Bush's total support, Ariel Sharon is not going to stop the war whatever resolutions the UNSC may issue. The sheriff's understanding counts more..."

"U.S. Hypocrisy"

The lead editorial in pro-government Ethnos said (3/30): "Dead end prevails again in the Middle East. The Americans, the only ones who can impose conditions to defuse crisis and secure peace proved unable to do so due to the will of the omnipotent Jewish lobby. It is clear that the solution of this problem cannot be achieved through military operations but by eradicating the causes that recycle global terrorism."

HUNGARY: "Crossroads"

Foreign editor Gabor Stier editorialized in conservative Magyar Nemzet (4/2) the following: "Hatred has spread across the Holy Land. Sharon, who let the Jinn out of the bottle by his Temple Mount provocation has made a miscalculation. He can't win in the present war. A war like this does not have a winner. Arafat should be able to stop his radicals and the violence. The United States could put him in such a situation if it recognized that it is also the U.S.' own interest to apply equal standards."

ICELAND: "Bush's Policy Strange And His Statements Conflict"

Leading Morgunbla¡¦¡¦/u> asserted in an editorial (4/2): "President Bush¡¦ policy toward the situation in the Middle East is strange. His statements conflict. At the same time as the United States supports the statement by the UN Security Council, the president says that Arafat should and could stop the terrorist acts. How can he do that, since he is locked up and isolated by the Israeli forces?"

IRELAND: "Bush Left Floundering By Fast-Moving Events"

The liberal Irish Times had this piece by Elaine Lafferty (3/30): "Can George Bush do anything? Some say the Bush administration is paying the price for its benign neglect of the Middle East during its first year in office. But others contend there is a concrete reason why Zinni's mission has failed on almost every count: the administration's goals are unrealistic and misguided.... Bush is the first U.S. president to speak openly of a Palestinian state. The administration also supported a UN resolution calling for it. But instead of serving to encourage the Palestinians to reject violence, the administration's rhetorical recognition, delivered without a plan for proceeding, has actually encouraged them to fight even harder, some experts say.... The question now of course is whether Bush will play what he has in the past called the 'presidential card.' By getting personally involved, and by offering up some real political options, he still has the potential to affect the parties."

NORWAY: ¡¦The U.S. Must Force Israel To Peace¡¦

Social democratic Dagsavisen commented (4/2): ¡¦We hope that the U.. will not accept Sharon¡¦s statement that Israel¡¦s war against Palestinians can be compared with the USA¡¦s war against terrorism.... But we are not sure. The Americans have no experience with occupation as many European countries have. This is probably the main reason why the governments in Europe are more critical to Israel than the administration in Washington. Without strong international pressure on the Sharon government there is no possible solution¡¦ If there is to be a positive result, the superpower USA must lead the international pressure on Israel.¡¦

¡¦Israel¡¦s Useless Iron Fist Policy¡¦

Newspaper-of-record Aftenposten commented (4/2): "Sharon does not want to listen, neither to the international community nor to his own intelligence service that concludes that his hard line against the Palestinians and Arafat is working against its intentions¡¦ Neither the Israelis nor Palestinians will ¡¦win the war¡¦. If there ever will be peace and living conditions get better, the violence and terrorism must stop¡¦ Now it is crucial that the until now passive U.S. puts all its weight behind the work that is needed to again see a political solution.¡¦

POLAND: "Tanks Will Not Suffice"

Dawid Warszawski opined in liberal Gazeta Wyborcza (3/30): "Arafat not only supports terrorism--he is above all the leader of the Palestinian nation fighting for independence. He may be a fatal leader--his rejection of the Israeli compromise from Camp David was a suicidal decision--but one that is legal and internationally recognized. Isolating Arafat may weaken terrorism, but it will give him the status of a martyr."

"In The Trap"

Slawomir Szarejko wrote in center-right Zycie (4/2): "It appears that both sides are equally guilty. Ariel Sharon--even though he may be thinking about a return to the negotiating table and negotiating from a position of force--has tried to put the stakes too high. He did exactly what Yasser Arafat had done before. Both leaders are today in a trap they set for themselves."

PORTUGAL: "Where Is Europe?"

In leading financial Di¡¦io Econ¡¦ico, managing editor Helena Garrido maintained (4/2): "Europe's interests are very different from those of the Americans.... At the same time as he makes a practical appeal for Israeli withdrawal from Palestinian cities, Bush says he comprehends Israel's violence. The Bush administration's ambiguity and a certain dose of irrationality...has provoked the most extraordinary set of rationales. One of them maintains that Bush...is creating a war climate to keep up his popularity and guarantee [victory in] Congressional elections in November.... The Americans, for understandable reasons, always supported Israel more.... The Americans' approach is anything but helpful for peace, especially when this problem is dealt with via a simplistic dichotomy between good and evil. Europe, thanks to the diversity of its history and culture, could contribute decisively to peace in the Middle East.... But where is Europe?"

ROMANIA: "Washington's Ambiguous And Contradictory Policy Worries Europe"

Political analyst Gabriela Manea commented in independent Cotidianul (4/2): "The American position is also bothering Europe, which sees in Washington's actions an ambiguous and contradictory policy which will complicate even further the situation in the region."

"Confrontational Policy Will Never Lead To Peace"

In pro-government Cronica Romana, editorialist George Cusnarencu gave his opinion (4/2): on April 2, 2002: "The violent, confrontational policy of PM Sharon does not lead, and will never lead to peace. Similarly, the Palestinian attack policy will never lead to the creation of a Palestinian state. And it is equally certain that American support for Israel will not be ignored forever by international public opinion.... A timid attempt (to put an end to the violence) was made by the UN Security Council, which requested Israel on Saturday to immediately retreat from the occupied territories. But what does the UN represent these days? Israel gave a clear answer: nothing.... Such a bellicose mentality is normal, as long as President Bush says that he 'understands the Israelis' actions.' Not a word about understanding the other party, as would have been normal."

SLOVENIA: "Sharon Sailing With The Wind Of U.S.' 'Anti-Terrorism Campaign'"

Left-of-center independent Dnevnik (3/30) carried this piece by Zoran Senkovic: "Sharon has been successfully sailing in the wind of the American 'anti-terrorism campaign.'... Arafat, who is not innocent in the case of intifada...is one of the rare members of the Palestinian leadership who enjoys enough support to be a legitimate peace negotiator.... Sharon has persistently and intentionally excluded the only person who possesses international credibility to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli crisis, forgetting that in such a way, he is making Arafat a martyr...and producing new candidates for suicidal attacks."

SPAIN: ¡¦Arab Protests¡¦

Centrist La Vanguardia commented (4/2): ¡¦Very far, yet very close to such dangerous games, the U.S. continues to be the only one with any real capacity to stop the confrontation. The erratic policy of Bush, that asks the UN to demand the withdrawal of Israel while allowing Sharon get away with his actions, does not seem to be the most appropriate in a situation such as this.¡¦

¡¦Middle East, in Blind Rage¡¦

Independent El Mundo commented (4/2): ¡¦The U.S., which helps very little, continues to demand that Arafat ¡¦to do more,' while it does not ask Sharon 'to do less.' Perhaps yesterday¡¦s rise in oil prices will be the only thing that will trigger Bush¡¦s reaction.¡¦

"To Lose The War And One's Soul¡¦

Hermann Tertsch wrote in left-of-center El Pais (4/2): ¡¦ It is a bad joke to see the President of the United States demanding that Arafat, a captive in Ramallah, be more effective in reigning in the suicide bombers."

SWEDEN: "Only The UN Can Stop Mideast Violence"

Conservative Svenska Dagbladet editorialized (4/2): "The prospects for the future are gloomy. Ariel Sharon seems totally inclined to bring about a military solution though the escalation of the conflict apparently exposes his own citizens to an expanded threat of terrorism. An outside party must now intervene to put a stop to the violence. And this party probably cannot be the U.S., in particular if this would necessitate the establishment of a military presence in the region. A truce cannot be upheld without the use of force. The hunt for terrorists must continue, and only the UN holds enough credibility to play that role."

TURKEY: "The Palestine War Expanding"

Yilmaz Oztuna noted in conservative-mass appeal Turkiye (4/2): "The Ramallah operation is nothing but a real war. It remains to be seen how the US will manage to overcome the impasse in the Middle East, because it is impossible for the US to justify to the world the death of Palestinians as part of a war against terrorism."

"Playing with Fire"

Hadi Uluengin wrote in mass-appeal Hurriyet (4/2): "The risk of the escalation expanding to a global scale is rapidly increasing. The U.S. is playing with fire because of its unjust and irresponsible Mideast policy."

"Bush's Sin"

Ahmet Tasgetiren criticized in Islamic-intellectual Yeni Safak (4/2): "A superpower like America should take the role of a referee, but the Bush administration, as far as its rhetoric is concerned, looks like military back-up for Israel."

"Nightmare Scenario"

Sami Kohen wrote in mass-appeal Milliyet (4/2): "The Middle East escalation looks like the beginning of a long war. If tensions continue to escalate even more, the international community--and especially the West--will have to intervene. However, the UN is ineffective in ending the conflict, the EU is too weak, and the U.S. is indecisive."

"Shameless Bush"

Bahadir Bayrakli argued in nationalist Ortadogu (4/1): "The statement from the White House and the State Department was most incredible: 'Israel has a right to self-defense.' This is a shameful statement, and endorses both the Israeli occupation and the unadulterated violence. Peace will remain an unattainable ideal as long as the U.S. acts as it has.... The White House unfortunately is turning into a dark house painted with blood."

"The U.S. Impasse In The Middle East"

Yasemin Congar wrote from Washington in mass-appeal Milliyet (4/1): "The only way out of the current impasse is for the Bush administration to change its inactive policy and gets politically-involved. This also requires sending Powell to the region instead of a non-political envoy like General Zinni. The U.S. should make the Middle East one of Washington's number one priorities, and show that to the whole world. As far as diplomatic initiatives are concerned, the current situation with both Arafat and Sharon might be quite hopeless, but this should not be an excuse for inactivity."

"Palestine Dies"

Mehmet Ocaktan argued in Islamic-intellectual Yeni Safak (4/1): "Sharon is like a Nazi-leader, butchering the Palestinian people."

WESTERN HEMISPHERE

CANADA: "It's Not Enough To Take Out Arafat"

The leading Globe and Mail opined (4/2): "Imagine that by design or by accident, trapped in his darkened Ramallah headquarters, Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and a group of key aides were suddenly killed. What then? The looming danger in this Middle East crisis of terror and retribution is that no one, least of all Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, has much of an idea.... Perhaps neither Mr. Sharon nor President George W. Bush truly believe that Mr. Arafat could halt Palestinian terrorism even if he wanted to, which he probably does not.... Were he now, from his isolated compound, to tell his compatriots they should become more conciliatory to the Israeli occupiers shooting and jailing Palestinians, while ripping up the streets and enforcing curfews, the laughter would be bitter and deafening.... What connects Mr. Sharon and Mr. Arafat, as the hapless Mr. Bush flaps on the sidelines, is that both leaders have utterly failed to acknowledge that there can be no military solution to this conflict.... Defusing the military tension is the first step toward the political solution that must, in the end, prevail. With or without Mr. Arafat."

"Bush Has Power To Ease Mideast Crisis"

The liberal Toronto Star editorialized (4/2): "Bush can run from the gathering Mideast storm, but he can't hide. Americans are beginning to wonder why their president isn't trying harder to defuse a crisis that...is spiralling out of control.... His lack of engagement puts his signature anti-terror campaign at risk. America's prestige will suffer if it can't defuse a regional conflict.... Will Sharon or Arafat dare refuse if Bush demands a ceasefire, a lifting of the siege on Arafat and a halt to terror? Unlikely. They'd be pariahs. At the same time, Bush should demand that both sides publicly accept Saturday's UNSC resolution and resume negotiations on a political settlement. Only a bold gesture, followed up by presidential engagement, offers any hope of breaking this tragic impasse, and preventing something worse. The president has spent enough time lounging on the sidelines."

"Let Israel Act"

Under the sub-heading, "It has a right to exist. The sooner its enemies learn this, the better," the nationalist Ottawa Citizen stated (4/2): "The suggestion that the United States pressure Israel to pull back is misguided: The Americans now should let Israel do what it must. U.S. influence would be better directed at those states that sponsor terrorist groups, that have supplied Mr. Arafat with weapons and cash, and that have helped teach terrorist tactics to Hamas and Hezbollah 'martyrs.'"

"The American Mistake"

Editorialist Serge Truffaut in Montreal's liberal French-language Le Devoir commented (4/2): "By voicing contradictory opinions, the American president displayed a worrisome lack of diplomatic touch. Several times during the Easter holiday, the U.S. President supported Sharon without ever alluding to the resolution supported by his own UN ambassador.... But shutting in Arafat, the only one on the Palestinian side who talks of the Tenet and the Mitchell plans, is a step Sharon should not have taken and Bush should not have supported.... The hesitations and detours of American diplomacy can be summed up in one word: Iraq. It is well known that the U.S. wants to end the dictatorial regime of Saddam Hussein. To achieve this, it needs the support of the Arab states...but the latter told Washington that no fire could be lit in Iraq until the one in the Mideast was put out."