The USA-Iraq crisis monopolizes the attention of the main international dailies. They report and analyze the announced Iraqi agreement to let UN weapons inspectors back in and the US and European reactions to the various possible “strategies” in combating terrorism. “The United Nations split on Iraq’s offer to permit weapons inspections”, is the headline in the Herald Tribune of 18/9: “The unexpected decision of Baghdad to permit the unconditional return of the UN’s nuclear inspectors writes Brian Knowlton in the American daily has produced a split between the members of the Security Council, thus complicating the US campaign in favour of a new UN resolution threatening a military action against Iraq“. Bush, for his part, reports the author of the article, “has said that he will be patient in dealing with Iraq but also that US military forces have continued for months a gradual build up in the region and the limits of Bush’s patience remain unknown”. “Bush in response to Iraq’s ‘yes’“, is the cover story in Le Monde of 18/9, which dedicates its editorial to the clash between Iraq’s decision to accept “without conditions” the return of the weapons inspectors and the position of the White House, which judges the Iraqi decision “a tactical manoeuvre”; Europe, on the other hand, advises that Saddam “be taken on his word“, at least until proof to the contrary is forthcoming. “At a time when Washington is conducting a difficult campaign to convince the United Nations to intervene against Iraq writes Alain Guillemoles in La Croix (16/9) a series of important arrests have taken place in recent days”. And alongside the declarations of Condoleeza Rice, national security adviser at the White House (reported by the French daily), according to whom “ Iraq clearly has links with terrorism”, La Croix also reports those of Pierre-Jean Luizard, French expert on security matters, who affirms that “no proven link between Iraq and Al-Qaeda” exists . As the elections approach, German commentators focus attention on electoral issues, with an eye on the development of the Usa/Iraq crisis. Writing in the weekly Die Zeit no. 38 of 12/9, Frank Drieschner points out the uncertainty of the electoral campaign: “ On the most important aspects, the programmes of the candidates resemble each other as closely as do their ties in the television studio“. The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) of 14/9 comments on Schröder’s position on the Iraq question: “ Instead of participating with Bush, Blair and Chirac in confronting the international threat, thus demonstrating the resolution and determination that alone can force Saddam Hussein to back down, Germany is standing on the sidelines: a voluntary surrender to the role of pigmy in international policy“, writes Günther Nonnenmacher. “ Playing with people’s fears may bring electoral advantages to the coalition” of Schröder the author continues – “ but the cost of the damage at the level of foreign policy “ will have to be paid by the whole country“, he concludes. In the Franfkurter Rundschau of 16/9, Jochen Siemens comments: “ Every effort deserves to be made to spare the world from a war against Iraq, thus restoring authority and credibility to the United Nations“. The fight against terrorism “ will take a lot longer and needs a good deal of mutual trust. It poses difficult questions, such as the proof of the gathering threats posed by Iraq as prospected by Washington, or the justified reference to the fact that the conflict in the Middle East probably fuels terrorism more than the tyrant of Baghdad“. Der Spiegel no. 38 of 16/9 dedicates wide coverage to the elections and to the situation of the parties. “ Final sprint“, is the magazine’s cover headline. “ According to the latest polls on the elections, the SPD [Social Democrats, Schröder’s party] and the Greens are favourites in the final run-up”, say Ralf Beste, Petra Bornhöft, Ulrich Deupmann, Horand Knaup, Roland Nelles, Alexander Neubacher and Ralf Neukirch. On the Iraqi crisis, Dieter Bednarz and Michael Sontheimer ask: “ Has the tyrant of the Tigris really transformed Iraq into a time-bomb? Or did the address of Donald Rumsfeld [US minister of defence] serve only to influence the domestic agenda, to persuade the representatives of the people of the need to attack Baghdad? To justify an attack on Baghdad the article continues US president Bush bases himself on dubiou analyses of the secret services and on studies that have been contested. British premier Tony Blair intends to reinforce the ally with fresh proofs“.
