[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 27 (Thursday, February 13, 2003)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E205]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            THE WRONG WORDS

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. MARCY KAPTUR

                                of ohio

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, February 12, 2003

  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I submit the following article to be 
included in the Record.

                [From the New York Times, Jan. 30, 2003]

    What the World Hears When the President Speaks; The Wrong Words

                         (By Abdel Monem Said)

       Probably no area of the world had a keener interest in 
     President Bush's address on Tuesday night than the Middle 
     East. And probably nowhere will there be greater 
     disappointment. People in moderate Arab states will conclude 
     that the president is woefully misguided in his approach to 
     the region's troubles.
       First, the American government seems to have divided the 
     Middle East into a set of separate problems, each in its own 
     little box: Iraq, Iran, the Palestinians and the Israelis, 
     fundamentalism, terrorism. To an Arab, these are all related 
     issues. The United States should concentrate on the problem 
     whose resolution would, ultimately, solve all the other 
     problems. That problem isn't Iraq. In fact, tackling Iraq 
     will worsen the situation in the Middle East. It is the 
     Palestinian question whose resolution has the best potential 
     for a positive impact on the region and beyond. 
     Unfortunately, it received only a passing reference in the 
     president's speech,
       Second, Arabs do not agree with the rosy American view of 
     an invasion of Iraq. Mr. Bush seems to believe that the Iraqi 
     people will look at American soldiers as liberators. In three 
     or four weeks Saddam Hussein and his cronies will be toppled. 
     In a year or so, Iraq will be a shining example of a 
     democratic and prosperous country.
       Arabs have a drastically different view. Some Iraqis will 
     look at Americans as new colonialists. Various Iraqi factions 
     and ethnic groups will take the chance to settle old scores. 
     Iraq will descend into chaos. Turkey and Iran will interfere. 
     The fragile countries of the eastern Mediterranean and the 
     Gulf will suffer. The Arab-Israeli conflict will become 
     increasingly volatile as violence and fundamentalism cross 
     national borders.
       Third, Mr. Bush sees the war on Iraq as part of the global 
     war against terrorism, In the absence of clear evidence of 
     links between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, Arabs see the Iraq 
     campaign as a deviation and distraction from the real fight. 
     Iraq, now greatly weakened, is incapable of threatening its 
     neighbors. Terrorism remains a greater threat. By going after 
     Iraq, the United States is taking the easy way out: a classic 
     war where it can find a capital to bomb, a regime to 
     overthrow and weapons to dismantle. The war on terrorism is a 
     completely different one, with political and socioeconomic 
     dimensions that call for patience and agonizing time.
       The historical bond between the United States and the 
     moderate Arab states and mainstream Arabs in general 
     contributed to the stability of the Middle East. For half a 
     century, the bond worked well--to thwart Communist expansion 
     in the cold war, to contain the waves of Iranian Islamic 
     revolution and to end in 1991 Saddam Hussein's radical and 
     regional ambitions. Now, it seems for the Arabs, the major 
     force for instability in the region is the United States 
     itself, which is moving militarily to Iraq, ignoring the 
     Arab-Israeli peace process, giving Ariel Sharon a free hand 
     in Israel, and insinuating a radical program for change in 
     the region without building strategic understanding for it.

                          ____________________