Cablegate: Media Reaction Report - Middle East - Iraqi

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

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 PARIS 007317

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR INR/R/MR; IIP/RW; IIP/RNY; BBG/VOA; IIP/WEU; AF/PA;
EUR/WE /P/SP; D/C (MCCOO); EUR/PA; INR/P; INR/EUC; PM; OSC ISA
FOR ILN; NEA; WHITE HOUSE FOR NSC/WEUROPE; DOC FOR ITA/EUR/FR
AND PASS USTR/PA; USINCEUR FOR PAO; NATO/PA; MOSCOW/PA;
ROME/PA; USVIENNA FOR USDEL OSCE.

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: OPRC KMDR FR
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION REPORT - Middle East - Iraqi
Constitution - Syria
PARIS - Wednesday, October 26, 2005

(A) SUBJECTS COVERED IN TODAY'S REPORT:

Middle East - Iraqi Constitution - Syria

B) SUMMARY OF COVERAGE:

Most headlines are devoted to domestic social and economic
stories, with France's new controversial anti-terrorism
measures eliciting several commentaries and reactions from
civil liberties proponents.

In international news the results of the Iraqi vote on the
Constitution is front-paged in Le Figaro: "Constitution
Adopted by 78 Percent of the Population." But above this title
the headline reads: "Inside Baghdad, Gripped by Chaos." The
story from correspondent Adrien Jaulmes states that "Baghdad
has become the world's most dangerous city." The editorial
emphasizes the importance of "the democratic" process which is
taking root in Iraq. It also notes that an exit strategy can
only be a regional exit strategy. In Le Monde, political
analyst Daniel Vernet writes a harsh commentary entitled:
"Iraq: Security or Democracy." (See Part C)

Today's second major international story concerns Syria and
the negotiations underway at the UN. In Le Monde Natalie
Nougayrede suggests that "Washington and Paris have different
priorities. A situation that could endanger the new Franco-
American rapprochement which was recently confirmed by
Nicholas Burns when he said in Paris that `the hatchet was
definitely buried.'" The different approaches on possible
sanctions against Syria is also reported in Le Figaro, while
La Croix picks up the request by Syria's Ambassador to France
for renewed contact between Damascus and Paris. (See Part C)

Liberation devotes its lead to the "dwindling assistance" from
the West to the survivors of the earthquake in Pakistan.
Editorialist Patrick Sabatier comments: "There is the
suspicion that the West is quicker to help survivors who share
similar cultural and ethnic background. The people of Kashmir
happen to unfortunately live in a region whose access is
prohibited to tourists because of a war and in a country,
Pakistan, whose reputation is execrable because it is a haven
for Islamic terrorists."
Le Figaro carries an op-ed by President Chirac titled "Europe
Needs Strength and Solidarity" which is simultaneously carried
in 24 outlets in the other European capitals, including the
Financial Times.

Financial La Tribune interviews Catherine Colonna, Minister
for European Affairs, on the controversy about the European
Commissioner's mandate at the WTO: "France wants the success
of the international trade negotiations. But these include
more than agriculture; they include industry and the service
sector. And for the time being our partners' offers are only
on agriculture, and they are insufficient at that. We would
like to see fewer concessions made on agriculture and more
ambitious offers on the industry and service sectors. While it
is the EU Commission that negotiates at the WTO, it does so in
the name and interests of its members and within its mandate.
A proposal that would be made outside the mandate would not
engage a commitment from Europe. Europe is already one of the
world's most open markets."

(C) SUPPORTING TEXT/BLOCK QUOTES:

Middle East - Iraqi Constitution - Syria

"An Out For Iraq"
Pierre Rousselin in right-of-center Le Figaro (10/26): "The
Iraqi Constitution is not ideal but it has the advantage of
existing. Its adoption by the people of Iraq proves that the
electoral process is beginning to take root where dictatorship
was the only known system. The White House has heavily
invested in this project. It is all the more relieved because
now it can seriously begin to think about a pull out. After
the December 15 legislative elections, the Americans will be
in a position to say `mission accomplished.' and start to send
their soldiers home. What better prospect with the mid-term
elections in the U.S. getting closer? Of course in Iraq
everyone is aware of America's calculus. And as things become
clearer, these ulterior motives become more evident. Will the
end of the occupation be a deliverance, as some want to
believe? Meanwhile violence continues. Many Iraqis feel that a
precipitous pull out will only accelerate a general conflict.
And no one wants this, including the Shiites and the Kurds, or
neighboring countries, such as Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
The resolution of the crisis must be part of a regional plan.
And the mission in Iraq of the Arab League Secretary General
is an encouraging first step."

"Iraq: Security or Democracy"
Daniel Vernet in left-of-center Le Monde (10/26): "The
positive election results in Iraq, after those in Afghanistan
do not justify interventions in `failing' or `rogue' nations
by other nations or by international organizations. It is not
enough to be a `benevolent hegemon' as Francis Fukuyama said,
one need also be a `competent hegemon.' The least that can be
said is that this is not the case with the U.S. in Iraq. After
the initial military campaign, the U.S. made irretrievable
mistakes in its `state building.' The first obligation of an
interventionist nation is to secure the population's safety.
Insecurity is endangering the entire reconstruction process.
In Iraq, the U.S. hesitated between order and democracy,
coercion and negotiation, occupation and transfer of power.
The temptation for many state builders is to impose artificial
structures, which do not correspond to local traditions or
societies. In other words, implementing democracy in these far
away regions requires time. Its rhythm does not coincide with
our western electoral calendars."

"The UN Hesitates About Sanctioning Syria"
Jean-Louis Turlin in right-of-center Le Figaro (10/26):
"Sanctions or no sanctions? The talks at the UN will be
delicate: while everyone agrees that the goal is to get
Syria's full cooperation, the choice of method is a different
story. France will probably be mandated to search for a
diplomatic solution because of its influence in the region.
But the White House has already increased the pressure and
said `a military option is always a President's last resort.'
Because the American President's vision includes a series of
international demands, such as the expulsion of Palestinian
terrorists. the French fear that the chances for a unanimous
vote on the resolution could be compromised. For this same
reason, talks of sanctions are raised with the up most
caution."

"Bachar al-Assad Wants to Resume its Dialogue with Paris"
Agnes Rotivel in Catholic La Croix (10/26): "The young Syrian
President does not understand that after 9/11 things changed
drastically. His blindness is isolating Syria even more,
including within the Arab world. Paris is one of the few
European capitals which continues to keep ties with Damascus.
But it is now annoyed with Syria's autism. The Syrian
Ambassador to France acknowledged that French ministers are no
longer traveling to Damascus: `We want to renew the dialogue,
but a dialogue takes two people.' she said on French
television. France is clear: the priority is bringing the
people responsible for Hariri's assassination to justice. But
will Bachar Al-Assad cooperate? And will Paris be able to
convince Washington to wait until after December 15 before it
begins sanctioning the regime?"

"France and the U.S. Have Different Priorities Regarding
Syria"
Natalie Nougayrede in left-of-center Le Monde (10/26):
"France's diplomacy is involved in a difficult balancing act:
while it tries to preserve a strong cooperation with the
Americans on the Syrian issue, it is also insisting on
different priorities. As a French diplomat said, France's
focus is on Lebanon. It does not see eye to eye with the
American administration on a change of regime in Syria. While
there is a partnership between France and the U.S. on Syria,
from the start the White House has adopted a different
viewpoint from France's. While France has wanted to reaffirm
its position in Lebanon, President Bush's entourage has been
more concerned with a regional perspective: including putting
an end to the infiltration of fighters coming from Syria into
Iraq. This discrepancy between French and American ambitions
and intentions is today out in the open. While a French source
says that Paris has no ulterior political motives regarding
the Mehlis report and its consequences, the subtext is that
the Americans do. As long as the issue at stake is the
investigation and getting Syria to cooperate, France's
position will be close to the American position, even if the
tone in Paris is less aggressive than in Washington. If on the
other hand there is in Washington a semantic shift towards
`fighting against terrorism' or `changing the regime' this
could cause a break or at least visible friction. The newly
erected Franco-American rapprochement, recently saluted by
Nicholas Burns during a stop in Paris when he said that `the
hatchet is definitely buried,' could well be undergoing its
first test." STAPLETON

© Scoop Media