Nov 17, 2002 op eds

November 17, 2002 Opinion Editorials http://www.aljazeerah.info

Arab News, 11/17/02

Is there a way to solve the Iraqi problem without war?

Jacques Chirac believes there is: the French way. The view in Paris is that the French way has triumphed and the threat of war against Saddam Hussein has receded. A recent headline in the Parisian newspaper Le Monde read “Chirac forces George Bush to retreat”.

Chirac’s Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin describes the Security Council resolution 1448, under which weapons inspectors are expected to return to Iraq, as a triumph for the French way. De Villepin, an amateur poet, waxes lyrical about France’s success to deny Washington “an automatic mechanism” to use force against Saddam Hussein. Even if Saddam violates the new resolution, de Villepin says, the Americans will still have to return to the Security Council and ask what is to be done.

How will the French way work?

All starts with a bit of semantic jugglery to delight the deconstructionists. The phrase “change of regime” is interpreted to mean “change within the regime.” The Baathist clique, headed by Saddam Hussein, is treated like a theatrical troupe that could play both Macbeth and Hamlet. All that is needed is to change the script and the costumes.

The French way is based on what is known in Paris as “France’s Arab policy” (La politique Arabe de la France). Devised by the late Gen. de Gaulle in the early 1960s, this is based on three assumptions. The first is that it is natural for Arabs to be ruled by a “strongman”. The second is that the Arab “strongman” has no particular principles apart from a keen desire to stay alive and in power. The third is that, if handled intelligently, the Arab “strongman” could be useful to the West.

The “strongman” could take decisions that no normal government, subject to the pressure of elections, would be able to take. French policy-makers believe that it is easier to deal with a state run by a single man than one subjected to the complications of collective decision-making and consensus building.

For example, President Anwar Sadat decided to reverse Egypt’s alliances in 1971, thus altering the balance of power in the Middle East. Other examples include Jaafar Al-Numeiri of Sudan, Muhammad Siad Barre of Somalia and Ibrahim Al-Hamdi of Yemen.

Yet another example is Yasser Arafat whose dramatic changes of position have exasperated more than one interested party.

Another example: Iran was much less of a loose cannon under the late Ayatollah Khomeini than his squabbling successors who cannot agree on who should play “strongman”. Khomeini was able to sign secret deals with the United States, which it called “The Great Satan”, and was able to instantly end the war with Iraq because he could decide alone. His successors cannot even agree on an anodyne dialogue with Washington.

Another example of a “strongman” playing a positive part is the late Syrian President Hafez Assad. He gave his word to President Richard Nixon in 1974 that no shot would be fired from Syrian territory against Israel.

His pledge has been honored until today.

Iraq’s “strongman” Saddam Hussein must be regarded as another example. In 1975 he put aside the pact that he had signed with the Soviet Union to make a secret deal with the Shah of Iran, and to bring in the French on a massive scale. In 1980 Saddam invaded Iran in the name of protecting Western interests in the region against Khomeinism.

The French admit that Saddam went too far in 1990 when he tried to annex Kuwait. But they blame “faulty signals” from Washington for that. The old chestnut is that the Iraqi dictator misinterpreted remarks by the US ambassador in Baghdad during a meeting in the summer of 1980 to mean that Washington would regard an invasion of Kuwait as “an internal Arab problem.”

The core of the French way consists of a belief that Saddam could, once again, be recruited by the West to do its bidding.

Chirac believes that Washington’s sloganeering about the spread of democracy in the Arab world, and black Africa, is naïve to say the least. Imposed democratization in such countries could only lead to tribalization, Chirac says.

If the French way is to be applied to Iraq it would be necessary for George W. Bush to go beyond the three to four months period of probation allowed to Saddam Hussein by Resolution 1448. Saddam Hussein should be given assurances that he is no longer targeted for a change of regime, and that “changes in his regime” would be deemed sufficient. He could be persuaded to appoint a prime minister, broaden the base of his power, bring down his regime’s level of violence, renew his offer to recognize Israel, initially made in 1998, and, above all, give the weapons inspectors enough toys to break as to make their mission look credible.

Under the French way, Saddam Hussein should remain in power until a suitable successor is found within his system. This has always been the method of change in Iraq since the overthrow of the monarchy in 1958. Abdel-Salam Aref emerged from within the group of officers led by Abdelkarim Qassem. When Abdel-Salam died in a helicopter crash his brother Abdel-Rahman, another army officer, became “strongman”. His successor, Ahmad Hassan Al-Bakr, another army officer, emerged from within the same clique. Finally, Saddam Hussein, a nephew of Al-Bakr, who died in mysterious circumstances, emerged as “strongman”.

The French view is that a complete change of system in Iraq could destabilize the whole region. A “traditional style” change, however, could preserve stability while ensuring that Iraq will not become a threat to its neighbors and beyond.

The real debate about Iraq is whether we want “regime change” or “change of regime”. Anything else would be posturing.

Financial wrecks
Arab News, 17 November 2002

When countries fail to meet their international debt repayments, the world financial system can exact a harsh penalty. The Argentine government has just announced that it cannot meet repayments totaling $800 million. From the point of view of the International Monetary Fund, the global financial policeman, the Argentines have had their chances to return to the path of financial rectitude but have failed to take them. Now the Argentine must take the consequences.

The consequences are dire for ordinary Argentineans. They have had their bank accounts frozen, their savings destroyed by inflation and the normal pace of economic life completely disrupted. Whenever a country nosedives into unmanageable national debt, the story is always the same. It is the man in the street and his family who suffer. Even in a democracy, where these people may well not have voted for their financially incompetent political leaders, it is patently unfair that the masses should be punished for the deeds of their government. And matters are only likely to get worse as the IMF imposes stringent conditions, in return for the inevitable bailout. Government spending will be cut, taxes will be raised as the country is refocused on the single task of earning sufficient foreign currency from exports to pay back the creditors.

It will all be a question of confidence. Once the international community has been assured that debt repayments are flowing again, international bank lines will be reopened, overseas investors will return and gradually normal trading life will recommence. It is, however, almost inevitably a long and painful process. There has to be a better way to cope with these recurrent financial wrecks. At the moment, the standard treatment for an economically distressed country is akin to applying an elastoplast to a broken leg. And worse, the subsequent treatment is rather like enforced star jumps. In working out a better solution, it is important to remember the true nature of “confidence”. Foreign bankers and business will return to a country when they believe that they will not be alone in doing so. They had almost certainly stayed on there even though they knew perfectly well that the economy was heading for disaster. It was probably very profitable for them because as the risks rose, they could charge more for the funds they lent. They only quit when it became a matter of common currency that disaster was looming. Then their departure, which was en masse, precipitated the collapse. Most of them will have lost money on outstanding short-term loans but will probably have made a great deal more on earlier loans which have been repaid.

They were “confident” until the last moment, because they were cynical. When they return to healing economies, they will be equally cynical. Subsequent recovery may not be real but it will be a recovery, as long as everyone pretends that it is.

At the heart of world finance, therefore, lies a great pretence. The same outlook underpins stock market booms when common sense dictates that the financial fundamentals are insane. Maybe a first step in avoiding the economic collapse of an economy like that of the Argentine, will be the injection of honesty into the appraisal of confidence. If a government is behaving unwisely, then those who know better should not pretend that all is well and create confidence where none should exist.

Blood shedders

By M.N.,

Syria Times, 16-11-2002

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon stressed once again that he intends to continue his military campaign unabated. His new War Minister Shaul Mofaz stressed that he had given the green light to his troops to launch a large-scale and unlimited time operation in the West Bank. Benjamin Natanyahu, the Foreign Minister, undertook to expel the Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat when he assumes power as Prime Minister.

Sharon- Mofaz- Natanyahu's statements seem as if these terrorists are racing to show their blood thirst in order to satisfy the Israeli electorate prior to the elections scheduled in January 2003.

For this purpose, the three terrorists confirm that they are determined to escalate the method of killing and destruction paying no heed neither to the international law, particularly the Geneva 4th Convention related to the protection of civilians under occupation nor to the UN resolutions the last of which was Tuesday. The call asked Israel to halt its violations of human rights, operations of destruction of the Palestinian infrastructure, collective punishment and expelling measures which threaten the future of the Palestinian people.

The policy of extremism adopted by the Israeli officials constitutes a real danger to the region's security, particularly that these officials possess sophisticated American weapons besides the mass destruction ones. The Israeli officials prove everyday that they are against peace.

Therefore, the UN role must be activated and strengthened and its resolutions must be implemented.

The question is : Why didn't the UN show the same enthusiasm, as it did towards Iraq, when the matter is related to Israel?!! Till when will the double-standard policy continue?!!

Hidden agenda to remodel ME to Israel's advantage

By Area al-A

Syria Times, 14-11-2002

In early February President Bush announced that he was going to attack Iraq (followed in due course, by Iran and North Korea). Why did the target change? What on earth happened? Has the Bush administration turned its wrath on other enemies after failing to find the men who were actually responsible for the September attack or it may have had to do with maintaining wartime levels of support for the government in an election year? Or is there an American- Israeli hidden agenda to remodel the Middle East to Israel's advantage starting with Iraq?

The late French president George Pompidou used to say that there is "nothing coincidental in politics except death, which surprises the hero, be he in the center of the stage or in the wings ". Yes it seems quite clear that Bush's policy shift is not coincidental. In fact, there is no evidence connecting Iraq with September 11, nor any reason to think the Iraqi regime would have been involved .why then did president Bush choose Iraq as a new target? is it for capturing Iraq's oil resources or for dominating the gulf area or for some hidden agenda ?

Addressing the General Assembly he said: "we will not allow any terrorist or tyrant to threaten civilization with weapons of mass murder... we will not relent until justice is done and our nation is secure. ... What our enemies have begun we will finish" . On the day after the anniversary of the attack, just ahead of Bush's UN speech, the White House released a 22- page indictment of the Iraqi regime. The document accuses the Iraqi regime of seeking weapons of mass destruction and backing terrorism in a " decade of deception and defiance" and addresses Iraq's violations of UN resolutions aimed at disarming it.

Escalating its campaign of terror the US administration indicated that the US action against Baghdad was "unavoidable" unless the United Nations disarmed Iraq. And if the UN failed to do so the US will use force to disarm Baghdad. War against Iraq will be inevitable if the UN did not submit to Washington's demands. Mr. Bush has publicly admitted more than once his aim to topple the Iraqi regime with the UN or without it and he will go it alone if necessary. However, such rampant unilateralism undermines the very authority of the United Nations. And undermines the laws which govern international relations. It undermines the logic of justice and equality among nations, world peace and security, international legitimacy and states sovereignty.

However, many Arab observers argue that Washington's insistence on " regime change " in Iraq is part of a wider plan to " remodel" the Middle East in conformity with US and Israel's interests. Moreover, the Arab world appears to be, for once unanimous. It opposes US military action to topple the Iraqi regime, a project that it sees as designed to seal Israel domination of the Middle East. Arab league Secretary General , Amr Mousa, warned that such an action against Iraq would "open the gates of hell in the already volatile region" . Syrian Vice- President Abdelhalim Khadam warned on a visit to Paris against military action in Iraq since it would have " disastrous consequences not only for Iraq, but for the entire region and beyond" he added that such a result would achieve " Israel's strategic objective to see the Arab world disintegrated".

The Arab media expressed their deep concern over the US policy and most Arab analysts believe that there is a concrete evidence of a scheme involving the US and Israel. " It is clear that the aim of this scheme is to balkanize Iraq ... something that would facilitate the task for Israel in its confrontation with the Arab states " as the Qatar's daily newspaper al -Raya said. " Long on rhetoric and short of evidence, US officials have not yet produced anything convincing to justify their plans to go to war, beyond that tiresome refrain about weapons of mass destruction " wrote Saudi columnist Fawaz Turki.

However, it is easy to find enough evidence of US and Israeli coordination since the Bush's administration has identified itself with Israel. Us baking and support of Israel's terrorism against the Palestinian people is a concrete evidence of such a hidden agenda behind the vicious campaign against Iraq. Another evidence is clear in the report published by the Israeli Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies called " A Clean Break: a new strategy for securing realms" which lays out ideas for modeling the region starting with Iraq. " Israel can shape its strategic environment in cooperation with Turkey, by weakening, containing and even rolling back Syria ". " This effort can focus on removing the Iraqi regime from power, an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right, as a means of foiling Syria's regional ambitions" the report said.

One of the reports authors was Richard Pearle, whom Bush has appointed chairman of the Defense Policy Board, an advisory panel to the pentagon.

However, the Security Council resolution 1441 has, at least for the time being, delayed any unilateral military action against Iraq. At the same time it stresses in a way or another that " the charter of Bush and his administration is not a substitute for the charter of the United Nations". But will Bush and his administration concede to this fact.

A fair superpower needed...

By M. Agha

Syria Times, 14-11-2002

No doubt the United States of America is the only superpower in the world. This is not only a privilege for the States but also a responsibility vis-ˆ-vis the current world problems and hot issues. The American Administration has the ability and power to effectively interfere in the international affairs and to find solutions to intricate crises. Such a position taken by the US needs two main qualities: courage and wisdom, particularly that it takes the helm as the guard-angel of the so-called new world order which it wants to impose on the world willy-nilly.

Nobody denies the super powers of the States in military, scientific and economic domains, but everybody wants this superpower to shoulder its responsibility fairly and honestly on the basis of right and justice.

The developments in the Middle East and in other parts of the world show the opposite. The US Administration's foreign policy is disappointing to everybody.

This Administration continues to ignore the facts of Arab-Israeli conflict and to deviate from the path of right and justice.

The international events are evidence of this fact. Washington is conniving with the war crimes perpetrated by Israel and seek every means to defend the state terror policy pursued by Ariel Sharon. Moreover, the US stands as protector of Israel at the UN Security Council. It prevents the issuing of any resolution that may contribute to the restoration of usurped Arab rights and occupied territories.

Meanwhile, as the Security Council issued Resolution No. 1441 which does not give licence to any party to automatically launch a military attack on Iraq, Washington is bent on preparing a strike against this Arab country regardless of the international community's opposition.

Not only the Arabs, but also the world as a whole, demand the US to be a true guardian of the international legitimacy resolutions, not to side with war criminals, who violate the very bases of human rights and contradict the very spirit of laws and conventions.

American Plan To Democratize the Middle East

SyriaTimes, 12-11-2002

Dr. Khalaf al- Jarad, editor-in-chief of Teshreen daily and Teshreen al- Osboui weekly, wrote that interested people and specialists in the field of strategic and political affairs must have heard of the name of the Heritage Organization which represents one of the most prominent research and studies establishments in the U.S.A.

In 1992, the Heritage establishment published a study in which the establishment heralded the advent of extreme right or the so-called Current of new Conservatives in the Republican Party whose views regarding the Middle East Region are extreme.

The study showed the options and arrangements required to re-organize the regional plan to suit American interests and the interest of Israel- America's strategic ally.

In fact, the extreme right in the Republican party succeeded in controlling the circles of the decision- making in the White House.

Today, tens of studies, research papers and recommendations say that the Zionist entity must play the decisive role in re-shaping the Middle east area; and this role must be extended to south east Asia and any Islamic area all over the world.

The Zionist entity began to carry out its duties regarding the economic and political hegemony over the Republics of Central Asia of the former Soviet Union.

The American strategic plans to control the Middle East in particular, and the world in general need no evidences to convince enemies and friends.

Preventive and pre-emptive strikes represent present day policies of the U.S.A. War on Terrorism is only a cover to hide America's real policies regarding the control of the whole world.

The whole world under America's War on terrorism must side with America blindly and even without any questioning regarding alleged international security and stability, mass destruction weapons of a number of states and rogue states...

America's plans to re-structure and reorganize the Middle East must be achieved, according to the American Administration and the Extreme Right in the Republican Party, through urgent surgical operations and cutting off certain parts of the bodies of the Middle east.

These cut off parts must, again, most be turned into fragile entities and cantons depending on foreign loans and foreign military protection.

Obligatory change of the regimes in the Middle East is an important means in the democratization process of the Middle East.

The democratization process of the American Right Wing in the Republican party regarding the Middle East depend on economic and political pressure, military intervention and encouraging ethnic minorities to set up independent homelands.

Theoretical Questions Raised by the Intifada

By A. Halaweh

Syria Times, 12-11-2002

The Intifada has revitalized the contemporary Palestinian revolution, raising many new theoretical issues, while reasserting old ones. Turbulent revolutionary periods demand that we find new styles of thinking and practice, suitable to these developments, in order to create the means of struggle needed for the new situation.

Among the issues raised with new urgency is the relation between the struggle inside and outside of Palestine- the interior and the exterior. This has always been a particularity of the Palestinian revolution since more than half of the Palestinian people live in exile.

Over the years, the center of gravity-the leadership, as well as the military, informational and financial headquarters-has been stationed outside Palestine. This gave the relation between the interior and the exterior a different character than that prevailing in other liberation movements. In the Palestinian situation this has become a major issue relevant to the revolution's overall political and military activities; it is an essential issue in the Palestinian strategy.

The revolution's center of gravity was supposed to be inside Palestine all along-from the time of the resistances presence in Jordan, later in Lebanon and so on. Yet the center was always outside, and while it devoted attention to the interior, this was inadequate.

The 1982 invasion and the PLO's departure from Beirut was a big loss for the Palestinian revolution's exterior center. Due to these losses, the arena of action in the occupied territories took on top priority. In the period from 1982 until the outbreak of the 1987 uprising, there were significant developments which made the uprising inevitable.

Being primarily in exile, the revolution was subject to the influence and pressure of the Arab regimes. This pressure had a great influence on the Palestinian strategy and tactics. The various components of Palestinian leadership have derived political and military weight from their respective Arab counterparts among the ruling Arab bourgeoisie. This further complicated the internal struggle within the Palestinian revolution, and influenced the policies, activities and confrontation plans of the Palestinian leadership as a whole.

Of course, the Arab regime's influence has not been the deciding factor in the Palestinian bourgeois policies, because in the final analysis, the decisive factor is chiefly internal. However the factor of the Arab regime's influence gains more significance, the more the Palestinian bourgeois policies approach the official Arab policies.

The fact that the center of gravity lies outside Palestine, has had a series of negative effects on the Palestinian revolution. Most prominent among these are the military blows and repression to which it has been subjected; moreover, the revolution has been partially deprived of its opportunity to work among the masses. Nonetheless, the concentrated presence of the revolution's center in the exterior has enabled a number of achievements over the last decades.

It was not due to the wish of any organization that the center of the revolution has been in the exterior. Rather, this situation was dictated by a number of historical circumstances, both objective and subjective. Due to the particularity of the Palestinian cause, the interior-exterior dialectic is bound to continue. Therefore, any discussion of this matter revolves around a proportional shift in this relationship, i. e, relative shifts in action and influence.

After the 1982 invasion of Lebanon, the principle Palestinian organizations concentrated on the work in the occupied territories.

This push, together with the accumulation of militant experience by the masses in the occupied territories, paved the way for the 1987 uprising which, in turn, strongly revived the issue of the proportional weight between the interior and the exterior. Being a qualitative turning point in the Palestinian national struggle, the uprising necessitated a new form of relation between the interior and the exterior-and a shift in favor of the interior.

This will make the interior more qualified to chart the Palestinian policies in the future.

Oppression breeds nothing but more determination

Syria Times, 12-11-2002

The youth of the uprising in Palestine are paying a heavy price in martyrs due to the United Nations slackness in fulfilling its duties and obligations. A multi-national peace observation force should have been deployed in the occupied Palestinian territories since the early days of the Sharon-launched massacres and intimidations to the Palestinian territories with his planned and prefabricated visit to the Holy Mosque of al-Aqsa. With the absence of an international legitimacy, our Palestinian people are left with one choice; that is to fight for themselves, for their rights and for the future of their generations. the Palestinian people are offered choice, which is an open game in an open death field. Everybody knows that no one has the slightest chance of survival when he faces an armored tank with his bare hands. It is as simple as this to say that no one has any chance of survival when the car he is driving is targeted by an Apache helicopter. It can be further said that no one will accept to be told to keep silent and to live in peace while a gun is pointed at his head. The package of rewards prepared by Sharon's govt. still goes beyond. Those Palestinians who do not play the game in accordance with the rules put by Sharon are named militants and will be subject to a variety of procedures ranging from deportation, in the best of cases, up to racial cleansing whenever deemed necessary. Everybody knows the simplest principle of dealing when two parties are brought together, that is, "take it or leave it". Here, the situation is different, it is a matter of "take it cause this is all what you're going to get"!

The worldwide attitude towards this case covers the same rainbow of positions usually encountered in such cases. The United States is as usual still supports Israel with every means possible. This is not something new or extraordinary. This has been the case along the past fifty years. Things are not expected to witness any change as long as there is a Zionist lobby dominating the American electoral mechanisms and campaigns. The generous American tax payers do not seem to be concerned about their money which goes to support their assumed ally in the Middle East! On the other hand, Sharon knows how to best employ these amounts of money donated by those benevolent friends! Sharon knows that these amounts of money will bring the United States the biggest deal of hatred by the peoples of the world if they are employed right; if they are employed to kill more and more Palestinians just like what he is doing at the moment.

The influence of the unilateral super power at the popular level is almost at its minimum. On the contrary, when the US pressure is exercised at the popular level, it yields nothing but more hatred and criticism. That is why we find the peoples all over the world denouncing the US threats of launching wars under the pretext of fighting terrorism which is in actual fact the same usual tendency to control the world.

According to the pro-Zionist propaganda, Israel is entitled to security! As for the Palestinians, they are more than secured! They enjoy Sharon's full care! Sharon takes care of everything! He takes care of the Palestinian men and women, elderly or young. Even the orphans have their share of this stream of emotions! Orphans, just like the rest of Palestinian kids, are served a quick end to their tragic lives that saves them the trouble of long suffering before they are agitated.

The future generations of Palestine deserve a better life taking into consideration the heavy price the present generation of the uprising is paying every minute. Palestinian martyrs are falling on daily basis and around the clock, a fact nobody can ignore with the Palestinian number of victims rising to more than 2000 taking into account the blurred number of victims who fell in Jenin Refugee Camp. With a situation like this, the least thing expected from the United Nations is a multi-national force to be dispatched in the occupied territories in order to ensure the non-occurance of the massacres witnessed in the on almost daily basis under the pretext of safeguarding the security of Israel!

It is no exaggeration to say that the peoples of the world feel for the Palestinian people in this distress of theirs under such an occupation, nor it is a jump to a quick conclusion to say that the situation in Palestine is the last and the only one of its kind on our planet "Earth". This is quite simply because the Israeli occupation of Palestine is the only one and the last of its kind on earth; a fact nobody can deny or ignore. Our modern world of the twenty first century is still witnessing a case of colonial occupation in the age of internet and digital revolution.

The lesson we learn from history is quite simple; those who keep silent today will lose their tongues by tomorrow cause one victim is not enough to a hungry predator like the movement of Zionism of today with all the support and care it receives from the US and the UK who are preparing to launch a war on Iraq just to please and satisfy this deer ally of theirs. Our Palestinian people will surely survive this tragedy and will definitely come out of this dilemma as victorious as they have been ever. The Arab land has witnessed a number of invaders, so did Palestine. Now, the only thing left is those traces left behind by such outcomes who left nothing in the memory of our Arab nation but more determination to have the more of them defeated.

Hopes pinned on Europe

By M. Agha

Syria Times, 12-11-2002

European nations have played a significant role in issuing the recent UN Security Council Resolution 1441 on Iraq, which does not give automatic licence to Washington or to any other party to launch a military strike against Iraq. It is right that the said resolution has not reflected the international communityance on the categorical rejection of the US attack on the one hand, and support for diplomatic means to find a peaceful solution to the standing dispute! The amendments made on the US-worded draft resolution have been constructive since they pushed away the ghost of war for a while, but it stopped short of finding a clear-cut solution to the problem.

Syria, alongside other members of the Council, has been active in playing a major role in finding a reasonable solution to avert a military conflict which might spread to other parts of the world.

Before the issuance of Resolution 1441, President Bashar al-Assad and Foreign Minister Farouk al-Shara made intensive contacts and consultations with a number of world leaders and senior officials.

These contacts and consultations brought about a unanimous vote on the resolution.

During his reception of the European Union's Mideast Peace Coordinator a couple of days ago, President al-Assad highlighted the European role and urged the European Union to play a more active part in putting an end to the Israeli criminal practices.

In this respect, France has so far played a pivotal role in opposing the unfair American policy toward Iraq. President Jacques Chirac has pursued a relatively-independent approach to face the militaristic spirit of the US Administration and the British government of Tony Blair. France opposed the American attempts to contain the UN. Russia and China also pursued a similar approach which helped the Council issue the revised resolution.

The European role has been a real supporter to the international legitimacy resolutions that provide for putting an end to the Israeli violations of human rights in the occupied territories, but the Arabs insist that the EU can play a stronger role for the realization of just peace and stability in the region on the basis of UN resolutions 242, 338 and the land for peace formula. Syria believed and still believes in the international community ability to help achieve a just and comprehensive peace in the region.

A Strong Protest

By M.N.

Syria Times, 12-11-2002

A half million people staged a demonstration in the Italian city of Florence on Saturday in protest against the U.S. policy which is pushing the world into an unjustifiable war.

This demonstration as well as others organized in various European capitals recently reflect the European understanding to what is taking place in the region. The Europeans hold the U.S. responsible for the Israeli state terrorism in the occupied Arab territories because of its open bias and unlimited support for Israel politically, militarily and economically.

The demonstration in Florence was followed by another in Belgium on Sunday. The demonstrators condemned the U.S. policy and hoisted Palestinian flags in expression of their solidarity with the oppressed Palestinian people. They hoisted placards saying "America, go to hell", "Stop dealing with Israel", "Palestine is free", and "Death to Sharon."

These slogans which were repeated in Rome, Brussels, Paris and London confirm that the European peoples reject injustice and prosecution and want their governments to work hard for peace which must prevail in the world, especially as these peoples suffered in the past from the agonies of war. The scenes of killing, destruction and bombardment of cities and villages which left millions dead in the World War II, are still fresh in their memories. We can say that the human conscience is still alive, and it is getting stronger. With determination the principle of justice and international law instead of the law of jungle pursued by Washington and its foster child Tel Aviv, can be realized.

The UN shoulders greater responsibility in interpreting the international rejection for the acts of aggression into actions to safeguard international peace and implement the Security Council resolutions by all without exception.

The European Union that adopted a balanced stance towards the region's issues is also required to put pressure on Israel and to boycott it at least economically in response to the feeling of the European public opinion and the principle of justice and equality raised by Europe long ago.

Opinions expressed in various sections are the sole responsibility of their authors and they may not represent http://www.aljazeerah.info