by MEMRI
Some Call It An Historic Agreement Leading To Greater Security And Stability – While Others Claim It’s A Bad Agreement Leading To Regional Arms Race |
`Following
the November 24, 2013 signing of the Joint Plan of Action in Geneva
between Iran and the 5+1 group, most Arab countries – including Syria,
Lebanon, Iraq, Qatar, Egypt, Kuwait, Bahrain, and the UAE – officially
welcomed the agreement, each for its own reasons, and expressed hope
that it would be a step towards a permanent arrangement that would
preserve security and stability in the region.
In the Arab press, there were mixed reactions to
the agreement, with some supporting it and calling it "historic" and
others expressing reservations and even calling it "a bad agreement."
The Syria government press and the Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar,
which is known for its support for Hizbullah and the resistance axis,
called the agreement a "victory" for Iran, which, they said, had finally
managed to "subdue the West" and has now become a nuclear state. Al-Akhbar even claimed that the Iran-Syria-Russia-Hizbullah axis is stronger as a result of the agreement.
The Saudi press expressed reservations regarding
the agreement along with fears that it would start a regional arms race
or strengthen Iran's position in the region at the expense of its
neighbors.
Other Arab papers claimed that the agreement
proves that the world recognizes the strong and withdraws in the face of
steadfast positions like those of Iran. Some even predict the advent of
an American-Iranian alliance at the expense of Arab countries, which
appear weak and unable to formulate a joint strategy.
At the same time, some articles called for going
even farther and for working for nuclear disarmament across the Middle
East by dismantling and destroying Israel's nuclear arsenal.
This report reviews reactions to the Geneva agreement in the Arab press.
An editorial in the government Saudi daily Al-Watan
stated: "...The way in which U.S. President Barack Obama described the
agreement yesterday – a path toward a world that is more secure – is
only a partial description, since the purpose of the agreement is to
neutralize a nuclear Iran. As for the military imperialist Iran, which
sends its tentacles into other regional countries, or [at least] tries
to do so by all means necessary – [this Iran] has yet to be neutralized
or to receive stern messages from the international community to cease
doing so. This means that the problem with Iran, provided that it
commits to the agreement [signed with the 5+1 group], was solved
vis-à-vis the international community at the [current] stage, but not
vis-à-vis the countries of the region...
"The problem faced by countries that neighbor
[Iran] is not just the nuclear issue, but a variety of issues of which
Iran and the 5+1 group are aware. These issues neither begin nor end
with [Iran's] support for factions that spark riots in other countries,
[or with] its sending its forces to kill the Syrian people to defend
Bashar Al-Assad's regime. Is Iran willing to solve all these issues in a
way that would satisfy the countries of the region and their peoples?
Herein lays the problem. As for the solution, it is in Iran's hands, if
it decides to change for the better and distance itself from dubious
ambitions."[1]
 Iran the big winner (Al-Watan, Saudi Arabia, November 25, 2013)
Saudi 'Al-Sharq': We Fear That
Iran Has Been Given Excessive Freedom Of Action In The Region In
Exchange For Nuclear Concessions
The Saudi daily Al-Sharq's editorial
expressed fear that in return for the nuclear agreement, Iran received
concessions from the 5+1 group on solving the Syrian problem and
authorization to operate more freely in the region while interfering in
other countries' affairs: "The Middle East treats the agreement
cautiously due to the fear that Iran made concessions in the nuclear
dossier in return for more freedom of action in the region or privileges
in the Syrian conflict... The U.S. administration sacrificed the
decision to punish Assad for using chemical weapons in the Al-Ghouta
region of Damascus [in August 2013] in order to improve its relations
with Russia... This raises fears that this scenario may repeat itself
here, and that what remains of the Syrian problem will be sacrificed [to
the cause of] signing an agreement with Iran that would end decades of
tension between Washington and Tehran. If this happens, it will be a
declaration by world powers that the authority of the international
community has ended and that its role has been relinquished. No one
wants the Geneva agreement on the Iranian nuclear issue to give Iran
concessions that will allow it to continue interfering in the affairs of
regional countries.[2]
Former Al-Sharq Al-Awsat Editor Tariq Alhomayed: A Regional Arms Race Is Now Wide Open
Tariq Alhomayed, former editor of the London-based Saudi Al-Sharq Al-Awsat,
wrote: "...It is clear that there are two major winners [in the
agreement] – Iran and Obama. Regarding Iran, it is no secret that
President Rohani is wrestling with a debilitated domestic economy and
needs [time] to recuperate, at any price. This agreement provides him
with an important opportunity to recover. As for President Obama, the
agreement allows him to avoid conflict with Iran and hand the crisis
down to the president who succeeds him...
"We are faced with a bad agreement that more
closely resembles a discussion of bad debts than a diplomatic agreement
to defuse a crisis. It portends not only destruction and war, but also
the advent of a wide-open nuclear arms race in the region. If Iran
claimed that its nuclear program was for civilian purposes, what will
now prevent other countries from attaining a similar program, that at
any moment can turn into a full-fledged [military] nuclear program, as
occurred in India and Pakistan?"[3]
 The U.S. and Iran sign the precarious "nuclear agreement" (Al-Ittihad, UAE, November 25, 2013)
Egyptian 'Al-Ahram': A Historic Agreement That Will Strengthen Regional Stability And Security
In an editorial, the Egyptian daily Al-Ahram called
the agreement an historic one that will increase the stability and
security of the region: "The Western powers and Iran have reached a
settlement regarding the [Iranian] nuclear program that could remove one
of the main sources of tension and threat in the region. This agreement
can be described as historic... Although the agreement is an interim
one, it can be characterized as a first practical step that reassures
the international community regarding Iran's nuclear activity and
ensures that [this activity] will be for peaceful [purposes] only. In
addition, the agreement may enable Iran and the powers to turn over a
new leaf [in their relations]...
"Though several countries and forces in the region,
chiefly Saudi Arabia and Israel, oppose the agreement for various
reasons, its expected contribution to strengthening the stability and
security of the region must not be underestimated. Israel has attempted
for years to recruit international forces to attack Iran's nuclear
[facilities], in order to serve its own interests, and this agreement
will largely remove [the threat] of such a confrontation, for which
Israel strives... [However,] since some Gulf countries still eye the
agreement with suspicion and concern and believe its implications are
unclear, there is no choice but to take additional steps that could
assuage the fears of the region... and use [the agreement] that has been
reached as a basis for a solution acceptable to all sides."[4]
'Al-Quds Al-'Arabi': The Agreement Paves The Way For A U.S.-Iran Alliance At The Expense Of The Arab Region
"The agreement paves the way for a comprehensive
regional settlement, [and] we believe the major Arab states will have
little influence in [setting] its guidelines... Some believe that the
agreement effectively paves the way to a U.S.-Iran alliance with Russian
backing at the expense of the Arab region, [as previously happened] in
Iraq, for example, and that Syria and Lebanon are expected to be its
victims. [This alliance] will make use of Iran's proxies in the region,
such as the Shi'ite factions in Iraq and Hizbullah in Lebanon, in order
to eliminate the organizations that are close to Al-Qaeda, such as the
Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and [Jabhat] Al-Nusra, now that they
have appeased Israel by eliminating Syria's chemical weapons program.
"As long as the Arab states are incapable of
planning and agreeing upon a regional and international strategy, this
scenario will remain realistic and possible... The Arabs who were not
invited to this joyous wedding will be content to emerge [from it]
unscathed."[5]
 The U.S. and Iran sign the agreement on the Arab back (Al-Ghad, Jordan, November 25, 2013)
Syrian 'Al-Thawra': Iran Has Been Recognized As A Nuclear Power
An article in the Syrian government daily Al-Thawra
published statements from across the world welcoming the agreement,
under the headline "The Agreement between the 5+1 and Tehran Recognizes
Iran's Right to Enrich Uranium... Iran Has Been Recognized Globally as a
Nuclear Power and the World Welcomes This..."[6]
Syrian 'Teshreen': A Victory For Iran, Which Claimed Its Nuclear Right By Force And Pushed The West Into A Corner
The Syrian government daily Teshreen called
the agreement "a victory for the diplomacy of Tehran, which claimed its
right to enrichment by force." An article reviewing the responses to the
agreement stated: "[Despite] intensive international pressure, Iran
managed, through a difficult marathon of negotiations over the nuclear
dossier, to reliably establish its right to develop nuclear energy for
civilian purposes, and managed to force official recognition of this
right. During the last three rounds [of negotiations], Iran cornered the
West, and with its steady positions and principles regarding
cooperating with the international community, it managed to produce an
agreement that lays the foundation for additional wise steps leading to a
permanent arrangement and that has put the entire region in the history
books..."[7]
The Lebanese 'Al-Akhbar': "The West Has Capitulated – Iran Is Nuclear"; The Russia-Iran-Syria-Hizbullah Axis Has Grown Stronger
The Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar, which is
affiliated with Hizbullah, published a number of articles on the
implications of the agreement for Iran and the region. An article titled
"The West Has Capitulated – Iran Is Nuclear" stated: "Iran is
celebrating its victory. Following intense efforts, it has finally
managed to attain the world's recognition of its right to nuclear
[capabilities], despite the West's efforts to deny it [this right]."[8]
Sami Kleib, a columnist for the daily, agreed that
Iran's greatest achievement is "the world's direct or indirect
recognition of Iran's right to enrich [uranium]," but also pointed to
another Iranian achievement: "Iran has considerable military might and
[engages in] extensive diplomatic activity, but it began to feel a real
need for monetary sources. Things reached the point where [officials]
with crucial [roles] in the strategic struggle were not paid their
salaries. A fresh flow of funds into [the Iranian] banks is a very
significant [achievement for this country...
Kleib stressed that the achievement is not only
Iran's but is also an achievement of the resistance axis as a whole and
of Russia. He wrote: "The signing of the agreement between Iran and the
West has opened the door to every possibility in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq
and even Afghanistan, but what is certain is that the
Russia-Iran-Syria-Hizbullah axis is [now] in a better situation, perhaps
a much better one."[9]
 Obama welcomes the Iranian nuclear peace dove while Israel undermines his efforts (Al-Watan, Qatar, November 25, 2013)
The Omani 'Al-Watan': The
Agreement Proves That The West Recognizes Only The Strong And
Capitulates When Faced With Determination
The Omani daily Al-Watan's editorial (Oman
participated in the mediation between the U.S. and Iran) stated: "The
agreement, in form and content, gave the Iranian diplomacy a medal for
its steadfastness and its insistence on its principles, for its refusal
to make concessions on matters pertinent to [Iran's] national security,
sovereignty and economic interests, and for preserving the Iranians'
[sources of] livelihood.
"The Islamic Republic of Iran's success in
extracting recognition of its right to possess nuclear technology and
use it for nuclear purposes proves that the West recognizes only the
strong and withdraws only in the face of determination and insistence on
principles. Under the agreement, Iran will suspend its nuclear program
for six months and will not add new centrifuges or advance the
construction of the heavy water plant in Arak. That is, the scope of the
Iranian nuclear project, which is under the full supervision of the
IAEA, will remain unchanged for the next six months, in return for an
easing of the sanctions. According to the former president of the
Iranian chamber of commerce, Ali Naghi Khamoushi, the U.S. unfroze $8
billion in Iran assets yesterday. In addition, the agreement permits
Iran to export limited amounts of oil and petrochemical [products], to
trade in gold and [other] precious metals, and to import auto parts; in
other words, it reopens the door to cooperation and mutuality in
economic [relations] between Iran and the world, and shatters the
isolation that [Iran's] rivals tried to impose upon it..."[10]
Qatari 'Al-Raya' And UAE 'Al-Khaleej': Similar Action Should Now Be Taken Against Israel
The UAE daily Al-Khaleej stated in an
editorial: "The agreement between the powers and Iran on the nuclear
issue poses a major challenge for these countries [i.e., the powers].
They claim that they labored to assure themselves and the world that
Iran would not develop military nuclear capabilities by imposing
restrictions on its nuclear program and supervision over its
development.
"[U.S. Secretary of State John] Kerry emphasized
that this agreement also guarantees Israel's security. It appears that
Israel's security is what concerns the American administration. However,
what about the Arabs' security and the security of countries that
oppose the Israeli occupation of Palestine? How can the Arab states be
calm when there is an entity near them that is clearly endowed with
immense nuclear military capabilities?
"The issue of Israel's nuclear capabilities has
been discussed at the United Nations for decades. The international
organization specializing in the nuclear issue [the IAEA] – like the
U.N. itself – cannot do anything on its own regarding this issue. This
is because the Western countries, and the U.S. in particular, oppose all
the reasonable attempts to handle this issue.
"The Arabs have already made major efforts to
realize two important [goals]. The first is purging the Middle East of
weapons of mass destruction, [an idea] that the Zionist entity has
stubbornly opposed with backing from the U.S. and Western countries...
The second issue is getting Israel to sign the Treaty on the
Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, [another notion] that the Zionist
entity opposes with Western support. In the agreement with Iran, the
West had no excuses. Therefore, security [matters] must be uniform with
regard to all countries, and preventing the proliferation of nuclear
[weapons] must apply to all parties..."[11]
The editorial of the Qatari daily Al-Raya
stated similarly: "The international community, which managed to achieve
this agreement after many years of difficult negotiations and a policy
of economic sanctions on Iran that damaged its economy, should join
efforts and turn the Middle East into a region free of nuclear weapons.
This [should be accomplished] by forcing Israel to submit its nuclear
weapons to international inspections in preparation for its dismantling
and destruction. [This] would realize the goal that regional countries
and the international community aspire to, which is turning the Middle
East into a region free of these destructive weapons..."[12]
 The U.S. waters the nuclear cactus (Al-Bayan, UAE, November 25, 2013)
Endnotes:
[1] Al-Watan (Saudi Arabia), November 25, 2013.
[2] Al-Sharq (Saudi Arabia), November 25, 2013.
[3] Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), November 25, 2013.
[4] Al-Ahram (Egypt), November 25, 2013.
[5] Al-Quds Al-'Arabi (London), November 25, 2013.
[6] Al-Thawra (Syria), November 25, 2013.
[7] Teshreen (Syria), November 25, 2013.
[8] Al-Akhbar (Lebanon), November 25, 2013.
[9] Al-Akhbar (Lebanon), November 25, 2013.
[10] Al-Watan (Oman), November 25, 2013.
[11] Al-Khaleej (UAE), November 25, 2013.
[12] Al-Raya (Qatar), November 25, 2013.
|
MEMRI
Source: http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/7592.htm
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment