KEY FINDINGS   

--  Israeli media split on Tel Aviv's conditioning Yasser Arafat's attendance at the Beirut summit on his stopping anti-Israeli terror; liberals wanted to offer Arabs "hope," conservatives insisted on "no compromise" on fighting terrorism.

--  Arab dailies predicted that Israel's rejection of the Saudi initiative would render it a non-starter.

--  Though offering different perspectives, both Arabs and Israeli saw 9/11 as complicating the region's fight against terror.

 

MAJOR THEMES:

 

ISRAEL:  Prime Minister Sharon is on "the horns of a dilemma" over how to deal with Arafat, Palestinians.  Observers concluded that whether or not Arafat is permitted to go to Beirut, PM Sharon faces difficult choices.  First, he must either accept or reject the PA leader as Israel's peace partner.  Second, he must either pursue "violent" confrontation with the Palestinians or embark on "a diplomatic track."  Conservative voices urged Sharon to oust Arafat from power, "despite the risk to his two most critical relationships: with Foreign Minister Shimon Peres and George W. Bush."

 

ARABS:  Success of the Saudi initiative depends on Israeli, U.S. acceptance rather than Arab support.  Palestinian and other Arab dailies continued to view Crown Prince Abdullah's proposal favorably, noting that while it offered "nothing new," it helped to elevate the image of Arabs and Muslims after the 9/11 attacks.  All Arab media treated the Arab summit's endorsement of the proposal as a foregone conclusion.  They argued, nevertheless, that the initiative's  success "depends" on whether Israel and the U.S. "are willing to take it seriously and positively."  For these writers, the crucial test would be whether Sharon--who "can be controlled [by the U.S.] when needed"--ends the occupation and participates in the peace process.

 

ISRAELIS, ARABS:  U.S., Mideast priorities diverge in application of campaign against terrorism to the region.  Arabs appeared keen for the summit to demonstrate that if the U.S. wants regional support for toppling Saddam Hussein, it must first make a credible push for peace between Israel and the Palestinians.  Conservative Israeli pundits were bothered by the perception that U.S. might be prepared to appease Arab allies in order to gain support for an attack against Iraq.  The conservative Jerusalem Post argued that "as much as Israel wants to clear the way for Saddam's ouster, allowing her citizens to be slaughtered with impunity will not help."  Ultra-Orthodox Yated Ne'eman intoned that Israel, like America, must "know no compromise" in the fight against terror, "even if one must pay a diplomatic price for it."

EDITOR:  Gail Hamer Burke

 

 

EDITOR'S NOTE: This report is based on 36 reports from 16 countries, February 27-March 25.  Editorial excerpts from each country are listed from the most recent date.

 

MIDDLE EAST

 

ISRAEL:   "An Unconditional Departure"

 

Independent Ha'aretz editorialized (3/25):  "Israel does not need to prevent Arafat's departure for the Arab League summit.  The Government should not present conditions for his exit, nor amuse itself with the idea of preventing his return.  It would be best if the Israeli government would announce without delay that Arafat can go and come as he pleases.  That would send a message of hope to this important Arab summit."

 

"Let Him Go, Let Him Come Back"

 

Chief Economic Editor Sever Plotker wrote in the editorial of mass-circulation, pluralist Yediot Aharonot (3/25):  "Arafat wanted a Hizbullah-style summit: weapons for the Palestinians, death to Israel.  He is getting an Abdullah-style summit: Palestinian statehood, peace for Israel."

 

"Israel Has Lost The Battle Of Beirut"

 

Diplomatic correspondent Ben Caspit wrote in popular, pluralist Maariv (3/25):  "The arrogance of Sharon and his associates in handling Arafat's release has degraded them into reaching a situation in which any decision they will take will give them a bad--even a very bad--name.  There is no positive option:  If Arafat remains in Ramallah, Israel will be the butt of harsh international criticism; the United States will be furious and the summit will turn into a hate-filled anti-Israeli show....  No less serious a situation would arise should Arafat leave:  He would arrive in Beirut as a victor, conquer the world media, deliver an extremely accusatory propaganda speech and push Israel into a remote...corner....  Sharon already said that should terrorist attacks take place and should [Arafat] make an inciting speech, he would consider not allowing Arafat back....  He knows that leaving Arafat abroad would be more dangerous that confining him inside the country....  Sharon must chose between two evils...as one is more dangerous than the other.  He can only blame himself for creating this situation.  He has maneuvered Israel into this confusion; he is the only one who can rescue it from it."

 

"No Ticket For Arafat"

 

Conservative, independent Jerusalem Post editorialized (3/25): "If Arafat is allowed to attend the Beirut summit without him taking any meaningful steps against terrorism, Israel would once again be signaling its demands to end terrorism should not be taken seriously....  Meanwhile, Sharon's offer to attend the Arab League summit has been dismissed as a gimmick, but he should take his own idea more seriously.  Sharon need not go to Beirut to get his message across:  He should give the speech he would have made in Beirut in Jerusalem.  In that speech, Sharon should lay out his hopes for a full peace with the Palestinians and with the entire Arab world."

 

"The American Example"

 

Ultra-Orthodox Yated Ne'eman editorialized (3/25):  "In making his decision [about whether to allow Arafat to attend the Beirut summit], Sharon will surely bear in mind--among other considerations--the American example, which views the fight against terrorists as a prime value that knows no compromise, even if one must pay a diplomatic price for it."

 

"Israel's Moment Of Truth"

 

The conservative, independent Jerusalem Post editorialized (3/22):  "Now it is Israel's turn for a moment of truth.  The Government must face the fact that Arafat will not implement the Tenet or any other cease-fire plan as a result of inducements, such as relief from Israeli military pressure or a meeting with Vice President Richard Cheney.  Sharon must decide that he is willing to oust Arafat from power.  This decision must be taken despite the risk to his two most critical relationships: with Foreign Minister Shimon Peres and George W. Bush....  Sharon must tell Bush that he has given restraint and diplomacy every chance to work, but that Israel cannot afford any more failed experiments, each of which costs dozens of Israeli lives and leads to further escalation....  The current American slide into enticing Arafat was not born of any belief that it would work, but out of a realization that Israel was acting tough enough to complicate American diplomacy, but not tough enough to win....  Even without Peres' support, the clear U.S. interest would be the success of Israel's campaign....  Arafat will keep escalating as long as the prospective campaign against Saddam gives him immunity from the United States and Israel.  As much as Israel wants to clear the way for Saddam's ouster, allowing her citizens to be slaughtered with impunity will not help." 

 

"The Saudi Horizon"

 

Independent Ha'aretz editorialized (3/22): "If Saudi Arabia presents its initiative at the Arab League summit scheduled for the end of next week in Beirut, and if the initiative is approved by the leaders of the Arab states, it will become a new, important element in the Arab states' positions toward Israel....  Many Israelis are prepared to accept the Saudi initiative because of the diplomatic vision it represents; however, the initiative will certainly be rejected if one of its clauses demands the blurring of Israel's identity through the extension of the right of return to the Palestinians.... The indifferent attitude [towards the initiative] displayed so far by the Government of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon will be unacceptable to the public.  The government will lose the trust of large segments of the public...who will not be prepared to forgive the government for having passed up the opportunity presented by the Saudi initiative--that is, the opportunity for shifting the conflict from its violent track to a diplomatic one."

 

WEST BANK:  "Israeli-American Pressure Prior To Arab Summit"

 

Sameih Shubeib opined in independent, pro-Palestinian Authority Al-Ayyam (3/25): "While the Israeli government is insisting on separating security and political issues on one hand, on the other it is linking any outcome of a security agreement with major political issues.  In his blunt remarks regarding the participation of President Arafat at the Arab summit in Beirut, Sharon stated that Israeli conditions have to be met by the Palestinians before he will allow a Palestinian participation in the summit.  The Israeli government and the American administration are relaying on their continuous pressure on the Palestinian Authority, especially prior to the Arab summit, in order to obtain more Palestinian concessions before reaching a cease-fire.  It seems, however, that there has been no Palestinian response to such pressure."

 

"The U.S. And The Arab Summit"

 

Ashraf Al-Ajrami opined in independent, pro-Palestinian Authority Al-Ayyam (3/25):  "Undoubtfully, Washington wants, and seems able to, dictate its instructions to the Arab summit so that the Saudi initiative be adopted in a way that will enable Israel to maneuver when talks eventually resume.  In addition, Washington does not want Arab leaders to formulate a position on Iraq that may become a hindrance to the American administration when it decides to attack Iraq [and needs support from Arab leaders].  In their final statement at the end of the summit, Arab leaders may state that they are against attacking Iraq and that they support the Iraqi people but this will not change facts on the ground [that the U.S. is planning to attack Iraq]."

 

"Arabs And The 9/11 Challenge"

 

The political editor of WAFA (the official Palestinian news agency) wrote in semi-official Al-Hayat Al-Jadida (3/22):  "We believe that the Arab summit in Beirut will be held at a critical time. The Palestinian problem and the Israeli practice of state terror are not the only issues facing the summit.  The eruption of September 11, which has shaken the pillars of the whole world, is a major challenge.  Many plans, maps and strategies have been launched to drastically change the world.  Therefore, we have to defend ourselves to be able to face a challenging power spearheaded by the Jewish lobby in the United States, which is trying to change the course of the war against terrorism to a war against Islam and Muslims, including the Arabs....  Thus, the Arab countries have to join their efforts and coordinate their interests to be able to make historic decisions to face this pressure and influence the U.S. policy."

 

"Cycle Of Violence"

 

Independent Al-Quds declared (3/22):  "There is no doubt that any violence aimed at killing civilians, whether Israelis or Palestinians, must be condemned.  It's incumbent upon both sides to talk together in order to find a far-reaching solution to prevent such violence from happening....  This empty cycle of violence will continue indefinitely as long as the Israeli government refuses to recognize a just solution as demanded by the Palestinians.  Such a solution, which will have to put an end to the 1967 occupation, will guarantee the realization of security and stability....  The successive Israeli governments, especially the current one, have tried various methods of repression and use of military power against the Palestinian struggle for independence and freedom. But all that has failed because, throughout history, such a struggle has been proven that it cannot be suppressed by tanks, warplanes or helicopters; rather, it has to be tackled by civilized and political means."

 

EGYPT:  "Do Not Leave"

 

Leading pro-government Al Ahram's columnist Abdel Moeti Ahmed wrote (3/25): "Israel set impossible and strange conditions for Arafat to attend the Arab summit.  These conditions have no legal basis and are unacceptable by Arafat or Palestinians....  Strangely, Sharon set these conditions insolently, while Vice President Cheney was touring the region and listened to this nonsense without any comment or defense of the principles of rights, justice and equality, of which his country boasts.  Sharon proved he does not want peace and his main purpose is to humiliate Arafat and subdue his people. The peace process will not have a breakthrough and Sharon will not stop his bloodiness and foolishness.  He is now at an impasse because of his failure to suppress the intifada....  All this makes us advise Arafat not to leave Ramallah, even if Sharon were to permit him....  It is more of an honor for Arafat to stay among his people and soldiers than to submit to such humiliating conditions.... Arafat does not have to be in Beirut, because the Arab summit will make the required resolutions necessary for Arafat and for the Palestinian people."

 

JORDAN:  "Israel Blackmails The Arab Summit"

 

Center-left, influential Al-Dustour held (3/25):  ¡¦While preparations for the Beirut Arab summit meeting are underway, Israel continues its dangerous policy of escalation, at the military level with murders, incursions and sieges, and at the political level with the impossible conditions made for President Arafat¡¦s participation in the summit.  This Israeli policy of escalation is directed at the meeting of Arab kings and presidents.  It is a blatant provocation and defiance of the Arab summit.  With this in mind, the Arab response to this Israeli defiance should be elevating the Arab stand against Israel and providing all support necessary for the resisting Palestinian people.¡¦

 

LEBANON:  "Three Factors Pushed Washington Into Changing Its Priorities"

 

An editorial by Rosana Bou-Monsef in moderate, anti-Syrian An-Nahar said (3/22):  "The United States has shown apparent flexibility in the way it has addressed recently the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.  It has gone beyond the security framework which had imprisoned its policy...towards a broader political-diplomatic framework which ushered in the U.S. decision to hold a meeting between Vice President Cheney and Yassir Arafat in Cairo next week.  This new American flexibility has also been apparent in way in which the announcement of the meeting with Arafat was proclaimed before Arafat had even started to meet the conditions demanded by the U.S....  How long will this renewed American interest in the Middle East continue?...  The United States has three considerations in mind:  The United States wants to calm the situation, not because it has Sharon's interests in mind, but because it has Israel's interests....  The United States also wants Arab support to topple Saddam Hussein's regime....  Lastly, the congressional elections are a factor that spurs the Bush Administration to work on calming the situation in the region."

 

MOROCCO:  "The Arab Summit Will Be Decisive"

 

A commentary in semi-official, French-language Le Matin read (3/23):  "The Arab Summit that will take place in Beirut...will be different from former ones.  Arab countries will have to debate two dominant subjects: Palestine, and the strategy against the campaign tarnishing the image of Arabs and Muslims after the attacks of September 11. The Saudi proposal gained the support of a great number of countries including the U.S.  The Washington initiative for the creation of a Palestinian State and the recent U.S. dynamism towards the Middle East have been welcomed by the Arab world.  The summit should benefit from those proposals and actions and will be important and decisive."

 

SAUDI ARABIA:  "Sharon's Overturned Logic"

 

London-Based, pan-Arab Asharq Al-Awsat held (3/25):  "Sharon believes that his attendance at the Arab summit will pave the way for the required settlement, when the real pavement for a settlement is his departure from the West Bank, Gaza and occupied Jerusalem.  The eventual sequence, from a logical point of view, is that an invitation for any Israeli prime minister to visit any Arab capital will come as a result of the settlement and not just an introduction to it....  The Arab answer to Sharon's suggestion to attend the Beirut Arab summit is that it is time now for Israel to deal seriously with the events in the Middle East."

 

"The Cost Of The Uprising"

 

London-based, pan-Arab Al-Hayat opined (3/25):  "It is obvious that everyone is attending the Beirut summit except for a representative of the Palestinian uprising.  Yesterday demonstrations took place in Yemen and Damascus to remind the summit of the 'intifada.'  The Chairman of Hezbollah declared that any summit resolution not supportive of the Palestinian intifada would be just another meaningless American plan.... Arab leaders have decided to support the Palestinian uprising by providing $55 million a month....  The Palestinian Authority is expected to reject a cease-fire agreement if a proper price to compensate them for all the blood shed during the intifada is not offered."

 

"Beirut's Occupation Will Never Be Repeated"

 

Abha-based, moderate Al-Watan declared (3/25):  "There will be no welcome to Sharon in Beirut or in any other Arab capital, even if peace is accomplished between Arabs and the Zionist state, all UN resolutions are implemented including resolution 194 (right of return) and Jerusalem becomes the everlasting capital of the Palestinian state.  Sharon, whose name attached to the shedding of Arab blood in Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt and Jordan, cannot be welcomed in any Arab land, except for trial."

 

"How To Deal With The Arab Peace Initiative"

 

London based, pan-Arab Al-Hayat stated (3/25): "The Saudi, soon to become Arabic initiative, that will be discussed in Beirut is intended to bring peace to the region.  It is said that American administration need for a solution, Israel's willingness to listen to new Arab views, and the stalemate that the peace process and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have reached are the main reasons that brought up this initiative. Realistically, Arab societies are not convinced that a new initiative is needed.  What has changed in the Arab-Israeli conflict that requires a new initiative?  Arabs have always kept peace as their strategic option.  To what extent would this initiative bring a solution to the current crisis?  It all depends on whether or not Israel and America are willing to take it seriously and positively.  It is up to the current American administration to decide if it is going to act as the Middle East peace agent or, once again, collaborate with Israel.  If Sharon does not want to participate in the peace process, will Washington endlessly keep justifying his crimes?  Will America keep telling us that Sharon is an elected leader acting in the best interest of his electors?  Washington has proven in the past that Sharon can be controlled when needed.  National Security is not the only issue.  Dealing with any Arab initiative from an Israeli perspective will defiantly kill any hope for its success."

 

"An Initiative Within Reach Of The Crown Prince"

 

Abha-based, moderate Al-Watan published this view by Abdula Rahman Muhamed Al-Lahem (3/25):  "Why not propose a peace initiative focused on the reinstatement of relations with Iraq.  Under the auspices of the Arab League and backed by a UN resolution, Iraq could be required to settle its outstanding matters including issues related to prisoners of war and missing persons.  All must display good intentions, leaving the memories of pain and tragedy to fade with time.  I think the Iraqi people deserve more, and the mood, more than ever before, is set for the launch of an historical initiative, given the Kingdom's posture against attacks on Iraq and the Iraqi leadership's appreciation.  So, will the Crown Prince launch a Saudi initiative at the summit for an Arab reconciliation with Iraq?"

 

"A Unilateral View "

 

Abha-based, moderate Al-Watan held (3/24): "Suicidal operations are not going to stop because of orders from Arafat or any other Palestinian source.  If the Israeli aggression and occupation of Palestinian lands does not stop, these operations are not going to end, even if the United States decides to place all of these groups on the terrorist organizations....  Zinni is witness to many suicide operations in occupied Jerusalem and neighboring cities, he is also a witness to the terrorism practiced by Israelis against the Palestinians....  Washington will always be biased and will always have a unilateral view of what is happening in the region....  If President Bush does not adopt a balanced view, Zinni will always be going around in a vicious circle."

 

SYRIA:  "The Summit Of Arab Right"

 

An unsigned editorial in government-owned Al-Ba'th said (3/25): "Most international moves, especially American ones, are not aimed at establishing peace in accordance with international resolutions, rather they are meant to rescue Sharon from his crisis and to try to liquidate the Intifada in support of Israeli interests. The Palestinian people have shown that they can cope with and overcome attempts to liquidate their cause without any concessions. This position introduces a new reality to the world that cannot be ignored."

 

TUNISIA:  "Don't Provide Sharon With A Life Boat"

 

Co-editor-in-chief Fatma Karray commented in independent Ash-Shourouq (2/27):  "It is nice to see the Arab mind moving in order to improve the conditions in Palestine and to lighten the suffering caused by the barbarian colonization of the Palestinian individual. It is also nice to see the Arab politician using maneuvers and spreading confusion among the allied ranks, who joined forces to abort Palestinian rights and bury the Palestinian dream of establishing a free and independent state....  But the nicest of all is when the Arab environment knows how to deal with this initiative and how to discuss it in order not to let this political action become a life boat for Sharon....  The Israeli maneuver in dealing with the Saudi initiative is clear...the Israeli prime minister is trying to escape it and asks for a dialogue with the Saudi administration.  As for Washington, the welcome came only concerning the first part of the initiative which deals with the Arab normalization with Israel, but prefers leaving the issue of Israeli withdrawal to the Israeli and the Palestinian parties to deal with.  It is very simple, Washington sent the entire colonialization file...to an imbalanced arena that unites victim and victimizer."

 

EUROPE

 

FRANCE:  "The Arabs Extending A Hand To Israel"

 

Luc de Barochez wrote in right-of-center Le Figaro (3/25):  "In Beirut the stakes are historic ones. It is a matter of once again opening a window for peace....  The initiative is a painful one for the Arabs, who are being called on to extend a hand towards Israel just when the country is under Sharon's leadership...and violence in the occupied territories at its worst.  With or without Arafat, with or without Sharon, the debate in Beirut is expected to be a harsh one....  The other big issue at stake in Beirut concerns determining the level of Arab support to Iraq against the United States. The summit is eager to prove to Washington that resolving the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians is more urgent than finding a solution for Iraq."

 

"Meetings In Beirut"

 

Right-of-center Les Echos editorialized (3/25):  "For the first time in 50 years, the Arab nations present in Beirut could together 'give a chance to peace' in the Middle East.  In short this is exactly what the Beirut summit could amount to: opening a new peace process.  By itself, it will not resolve anything....  But the offer made by the Saudis aims to establish normal relations between Israel and its Arab neighbors:  In other words, recognizing Israel's right to exist....  While both sides still have a long road ahead, the Americans are not about to reduce the pressure they have been exercising on the Palestinian Authority or the Israeli government.  In fact, the stakes in Beirut are so high that the EU's representative, Javier Solana, and the UN Secretary General will also be present."

 

GERMANY:  "Restless"

 

Center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine editorialized (3/25):  "According to U.S. and Israeli sources, Iran is supplying Palestinian extremists with weapons and money--and all of this is happening with Arafat's approval.  This latest revelation may just be a piece of misinformation, but Arafat is capable of such conduct....  From an Israeli perspective, this certainly does not help matters shortly before the Beirut summit....  Right now, the situation in the Middle East is hard to gauge.  Negative news is accompanied by other reports that speak of 'movement.'  However, it is impossible to talk about new approaches to the Middle East conflict before the Beirut summit has come to an end."

 

"Tired Before The Summit"

 

Center-left Sueddeutsche Zeitung of Munich maintained (3/25):  "Several things have changed already since the announcement of the Saudi plan.  At first, the Israelis were offered 'normal relations,' which would include the exchange of ambassadors and open trade....  After resistance from Syria and others, however, nobody is talking about 'normal relations' anymore, but simply about an offer of 'peace.'  The Arab world seems to be moving toward the lowest common denominator vis-a-vis Israel.  Israel must take action if any of the energy generated by the Saudi plan is to be salvaged at the Beirut summit.  Arafat must be given full permission to travel to the summit--as a sign of goodwill."

 

"Ridicule"

 

Centrist Der Tagesspiegel of Berlin judged (3/25):  "The Saudi plan is not very useful, because it cannot be implemented in the short or mid-term.  It is a worthwhile effort to get things moving again.  As illustrated by the difficult mission of U.S. special envoy Zinni, even a cease-fire can hardly be negotiated at present, not to mention genuine political progress.  Anything that might lead to progress is being rejected by Sharon and Arafat, including the Saudi peace plan.  Maybe the U.S. administration will finally take note of this and increase the pressure on both sides."

 

ITALY:  "Zinni Has Only Two Days To 'Free' Arafat"

 

Aldo Baquis filed from Tel Aviv in centrist, influential La Stampa (3/25):  "U.S. mediator Anthony Zinni is engaged in a race against time as he tries to achieve a cease-fire between the Israelis and the Palestinians before the beginning of the Arab League summit in Beirut on March 27.  Should he succeed--something unlikely, considering that last night's meeting between Israeli and Palestinian security officials, chaired by Bush's envoy, failed--Israel could authorize the participation of Yasser Arafat.  Without an agreement, however, the Palestinian President would be forced to remain in Ramallah--a development that would inevitably weaken the diplomatic peace initiative presented by Saudi Arabia over the last few weeks.  The military activities of various radical groups are taking place in the context of this complicated diplomatic game."

 

"More Attacks On Peace"

 

Conservative newspaper syndicate La Nazione/Il Resto del Carlino/Il Giorno declared (3/25):  "The situation is getting more complicated by the hour.  U.S. envoy Anthony Zinni is desperately trying to obtain an increasingly unlikely agreement for a truce. Arafat's position is getting more and more difficult, and his participation in the Beirut summit has become uncertain again.  And the White House is increasingly cold towards Arafat.  Vice President Cheney let it be understood that the chances of a meeting with Arafat before the Arab League summit are weak indeed.  While not ruling out the possibility of a tete-a-tete meeting with Arafat in the immediate future, Cheney underlined in an interview with the CNN that the Palestinian leader 'has not done enough to stop the violence against Israel.'  And as if that were not enough, a series of U.S. and Israeli intelligence reports published by the New York Times seem to strengthen his (Cheney's) doubts.  According to such reports, Arafat has signed a pact with Iran, months ago in Moscow, to obtain supplies of weapons to be used against Israel.  An accusation that Arafat's men reject strongly but that Washington and Tel Aviv sources have documented, with a wealth of details, to NYT journalists."

 

RUSSIA:  "Arafat Outsmarts Sharon?"

 

Konstantin Kapitonov filed from Tel Aviv for reformist Vremya MN (3/23):  "The opinion in Israel is that the Palestinians have gained much in the 17 months of Intifada.  Firstly, the United States' envoy is in the Middle East.  Secondly, the UN Security Council has adopted a resolution on a Palestinian State, and Secretary General Kofi Annan has been very critical of Israel.  As things go, Arafat is now in a better position to dictate the terms of a cease-fire than Sharon, who needs to find a way to start negotiations with the Palestinians."

 

POLAND:  "Sharon In Beirut?"

 

Dawid Warszawski wrote in liberal Gazeta Wyborcza (3/25):  "The idea of Israeli Prime Minister Sharon going to the Arab League summit in Beirut is as sensational as Saudi Prince Abdullah's initiative last month....  These initiatives restore a regional character to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which has been stuck in a bloody clinch, and open a way out.  To the Israelis, who are disappointed with Arafat's broken promises, the Saudi offer can restore the feeling that there is someone to negotiate with. As for the Palestinians, it can convince them that there is a way other than terror.  For this to happen, a direct dialogue is necessary.  Accordingly, it would be a good thing if Sharon were invited to Beirut."

 

"An Optimistic Scenario"

 

Ryszard Malik opined in centrist Rzeczpospolita (3/25): "By planning to appear in Beirut, Sharon wants to go down in history.  He wants to achieve a breakthrough in Israel's relations with the Arab world equal to those of his predecessors:  Menachem Begin (peace with Egypt) and Yitzhak Rabin (Oslo agreement and peace with Jordan).  Yet he will not take this step alone--he must do it together with his arch rival, Arafat."

 

EAST ASIA

 

THAILAND:  "Killing Chances Of Mideast Peace"

 

According to the lead editorial of the top-circulation, moderately conservative, English-language Bangkok Post (3/25):  "The bombing (in central Jerusalem last week) raises the pressure on Mr. Arafat.  The aging ex-terrorist gained the respect of the world a decade ago when he renounced violence to lead peace talks with Israel.  He is fast losing that respect--not so much for leading the Palestinians badly, which he has done, but for recent failures to lead them at all....  Mr. Arafat must show he is truly in charge of the Palestinian Authority, or make way for a change in the leadership.  His own men have rebelled.  The terrorist bombings are illegitimate acts, as Mr. Arafat knows.  The Palestinians have a legitimate demand for a homeland.  It would be a shame to put the search for a Mideast peace on hold while the Palestinians get their violent house in order."

 

"America Is Backing A Loser"

 

Imtiaz Muqbil commented in the top-circulation, moderately conservative, English-language Bangkok Post (3/24):  "The Americans are backing the wrong cause. This is as apparent to the Europeans as to the Arabs but not, however, to the Americans.  The naive and gullible people of the United States, only 10 percent of whom have a passport, are easily hoodwinked into thinking that this is about freedom, democracy and civilization rather than what it is REALLY about--the blind, biased and blatant American support for Israel and its illegal occupation of Palestine....  Sooner or later, common Americans will wake up to the extent to which Israel controls their political system through the twin levers of power:  money and the media....  The hypocrisy of U.S. policy is being increasingly unveiled.  A country that imposes sanctions on Indonesia over its occupation of East Timor now gives unfailing support to another country for doing the same.  It vetoes UN resolutions criticizing  Israel while rushing to enforce those that would give it power to attack Iraq.  How come?"

 

SOUTH ASIA

 

BANGLADESH:  "The U.S. Can Bring Sustainable Peace In The Middle East"

 

The centrist English-language Independent carried this op-ed article (3/24):  "Saudi Crown Prince Abdulalh bin Abdul Aziz's proposal to end the Arab-Israeli conflict on the basis of land for peace has been appreciated by all well-meaning people; if the land is there, then there is nothing else to quarrel about....  However, after many attempts it became evident that the only superpower, with her strong leverage on Israel and her doling out billions of dollars and military hardware and software to it on a platter, could find a solution to this conflict.  Israel without America is like America without the White House.  The U.S. should not tilt again towards Israel, if it does so then it would be foolhardy to think or imagine that a solution could be found in the short run.  Astute observers still feel that all these EU, Arab World and other efforts to forge a viable peace in the Middle East will come to naught unless and until the remote control switch is plugged off.  And the bottom line is:  In the black and white world of President Bush, the Israelis are the white and good guys, and the Palestinians are the black and the bad guys.  In his imprisonment of Arafat, Sharon has the full backing of Bush.  Sharon and the Israelis have the world in their palm.  Whatever Sharon says or does, good or bad, Bush is too eager to stamp his approval.  In the 'might is right' world, that is being enunciated."

 

##