The situation in Afghanistan and the Middle-East question again monopolize the attention of the international dailies. They devote ample reflection to such events as the American “reconquest” of Kabul or the television appeal launched by the chairman of the Palestinian national authority, Yasser Arafat, to put an end to the anti-Israeli attacks . “Where are Bin Laden and his troops?”, asks, for example, Le Monde on its front page on 19/12. According to the French daily, “the disappearance of Bin Laden deprives the Americans of a complete victory”: “The terrorist leader says Le Monde has vanished, Mullah Omar has disappeared and none of their inner circle of supporters has been arrested. The Americans thus see a question mark placed over their overwhelming military supremacy on the ground. After having routed the fighters of Tora Bora, they must now devote themselves to a long hunt for the fugitives”. “The duties of the Americans”: that’s the title of the editorial signed by Bruno Frappat in La Croix of 18/12, in which the author maintains: “So long as Bin Laden is in a condition to challenge America from an unidentifiable retreat, the risk exists that he will try to organize a ‘response’ to the response. In any case, the most celebrated fugitive on the planet will not fail to reap considerable mythological benefits. The mystery of his flight, added to that of his residence, will make his absence even more diabolically present in the world”. The Middle Eastern crisis, by contrast, is the focus of the edition of Le Monde of (18/12), in which the main headline reads : “Yasser Arafat is gambling his authority”. “Yasser Arafat the editorial declares has placed his credibility on the line by launching an appeal calling for a cessation of any form of Palestinian violence against Israel. For the head of the Palestinian ‘Authority, the test will be even more difficult to pass so long as the Israeli army continues its operations in the territories of the West Bank and Gaza”. The eagerly awaited speech of Arafat is evaluated by the French daily also by reviewing the various analyses that have been made of it by the opposing camps in the conflict: “The Israeli leaders emphasizes the French daily were sceptical in their response and asked for Arafat’s words to be backed up by concrete actions. Arafat is regarded as an inveterate ‘lier’… President Bush however judged the address ‘constructive’, but he too asked that the words be translated into actions. Paris, London, Berlin and Cairo welcomed the determination of Arafat’s appeal. Great Britain has asked israel to make a gesture”. The German weekly Spiegel of 17/12 concludes its 4-part investigation, reconstructing the tragic events of 11 September. In this week’s instalment, what happened on the actual day of the terrorist attacks on the USA is reconstructed minute by minute, beginning at 6.00 in the morning, through the eye-witness accounts of survivors: employees who worked in the World Trade Towers and firemen. “ The mendacious dialogue” is the title of the article that the same weekly magazine devotes to the problem of interreligious dialogue in Germany. According to Jochen Boelsche due to “ a superficial attitude by Germans of good will, the dialogue risks becoming a ‘multireligious swindle’“. The journalist identifies the main problems “ in the impossibility of finding an institutional and representative interlocutor of Islam in Germany” and “ the question of reciprocity in terms of religious freedom, which is denied in many Islamic countries“. On the front page of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung of 17/12, space is given to a long editorial on the prospects opened by the conclusions of the Laeken summit: “ The work of the Convention says the editorial is stimulating but also hazardous” because “hitherto nothing has changed from a political point of view in Brussels” and the Convention must also “ demonstrate its methodological and intellectual superiority“. In an interview with Matthias Drobinski published in the Bavarian daily Süddeutsche Zeitung of 19/12, Cardinal Karl Lehmann expresses some partial satisfaction for the fact that the new law on immigration has accepted some of the recommendations of the Churches, even though he recognizes that not all were taken into consideration; in particular he expresses appreciation for “ the greater protection for the victims of persecution and sexual discrimination“, and “the raising of the age for children to be eligible to join their [immigrant] families, extended to the age of eighteen“. “ What interests the Churches – continues Lehmann – is not an enlargement of immigration but the improvement of the condition of foreigners who already live in Germany“.
