Cablegate: Media Reaction U.S./Iraqi Standoff; Harare

This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS HARARE 001964

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR AF/PD, AF/S, AF/RA
NSC JENDAYI FRAZER
LONDON FOR GURNEY
PARIS FOR NEARY
NAIROBI FOR PFLAUMER

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREL PHUM KPAO KMDR ZI
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION U.S./IRAQI STANDOFF; HARARE

1. Under the headline "Will Bush attack Iraq?" the
August 25 edition of the pro-government weekly "The
Sunday Mirror" carried the following article in the
"Scrutator," the unsigned column written by publisher
Ibbo Mandaza:

2. "U.S. President George W. Bush's plan to wage war
against Iraq is facing increasing dissent at home and
abroad. Already, the entire Arab League. . .has
expressed strong opposition to any proposed military
attach on Iraq. . . Furthermore, U.S. plans to isolate
Iraq and topple Saddam Hussein will now be damaged by
an economic and trade cooperation agreement between
Russia and Iraq concluded last Sunday. While Russia
insists that the US$40 billion deal will not violate
the UN sanctions imposed on Iraq after its 1990
invasion of Kuwait, the agreement is certain to damage
relations between Moscow and Washington already cooled
by Russian plans to step up nuclear cooperation with
Iran, part of Bush's `axis of evil.'

"In general, most of the allies of the U.S. are
resisting the drum beating in Washington for
military action against Iraq, arguing that an
invasion cannot be justified without firm proof
that Iraq is developing weapons of mass
destruction. On the other hand, such `proof'
cannot be forthcoming without the `weapons
inspection' by the UN, a step now forestalled by
the current war rhetoric against Iraq. For,
Iraq would be foolish to allow `weapons
inspection' while the U.S. is preparing to
attack it. However it is within Britain, the
U.S.'s closest ally, that there is growing
opposition, not only to the idea of attacking
Iraq but also to the foreign and security policy
of a super power that has grown so bellicose in
its unipolar self-indulgence, that it has become
blind to the contradictions that characterize
contemporary globalization. Suddenly, even its
key allies are reminding the U.S. of the need to
adhere to the rules of the UN Security Council,
including, at least by implication, a warning
against the callous disregard for the
sovereignty and national independence of
(smaller) member states of the United Nations."

SULLIVAN

© Scoop Media