While a wary Washington cautiously supported the deal signed Monday by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, a sigh of relief swept across the Middle East.
Kings, presidents and diplomats across the Arab world had worked hard to avoid a conflict.
Even nations such as Egypt, which joined the military force allied against Iraq during the 1991 Persian Gulf war, concluded that more bombing would unnecessarily punish the Iraqi people, shake fragile Arab governments and further upset the balance of power in the region, all without necessarily removing Hussein from power.
Across the region, many Arabs said that, with the Iraqi crisis receding, nations should refocus attention on the stalled Middle East peace process.
Privately, many Arabs regret that the proposed deal would leave a despised Hussein in power, possibly stronger and capable of putting the region through it all again. The alternative, they said, was worse.
“The political option has won out in solving the crisis, preventing the Middle East from plunging into a dangerous crossroads which could have led to a catastrophe and threatened the whole region and interests of the superpowers,” said Esmat Abdel-Meguid, secretary general of the 22-member Arab League.
More Top Picks Fragrance
On Kuwait’s streets, occupied by Hussein’s forces in 1990, Kuwaitis expressed disappointment that their worst fears weren’t alleviated once and for all, warning that anything less than a major strike to oust the dictator would leave him free to sow terror anew. That message was echoed by Iraqi exile leaders in Jordan.
“He had all this time delay. Is it possible he was able to hide all his weapons?” asked Burgham Kadhim, a member of the Iraqi National Accord, an opposition group. “This regime survives on continued crisis, continued war and continued conspiracy. He will find something new in the months to come.”
Much of the Arabs’ exasperation with U.S. threats against Iraq was due to lack of progress in the American-sponsored peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians. There was no immediate indication that those stalled talks would be reinvigorated in the wake of the Iraq-UN deal.
In Jerusalem, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reacted cautiously to the agreement worked out between Annan and Hussein, warning Monday that Israelis still must remain on guard because the crisis proved they now live in a “new Middle East” of missiles and biological weapons.
Palestinian President Yasser Arafat welcomed the tentative deal, saying he hopes it will return U.S. attention to the faltering Mideast peace process.
Dubbing fears of an Iraqi attack with biological weapons the “anthrax crisis,” Israeli commentators lamented the appearance of panic it generated among citizens of the Jewish state. In past crises, some commentators noted, Israel had presented a courageous and unflinching face to the world.
“Today, on TV screens across the globe, we look like an American puppet, both in steps taken to protect ourselves and as a terrified mob controlling its government,” wrote Yediot Ahranot columnist Ron Ben-Yishai.
“The government sends people running from gas mask distribution points to the plastic sheeting store and from there, maybe, to the pharmacy for antibiotics. It isn’t important at all whether a third of the public is hysterical. Syria, Iran, Iraq and Libya know now what will bring us to our knees.”
At the Hamashbir department store in downtown Jerusalem, the earlier long lines at the gas-mask distribution counter dwindled Monday after news that Annan had struck a deal.
Israelis breathed easier, reasoning that, without a U.S. attack on Iraq, there was virtually no chance Hussein might lash out at Israel with anthrax-tipped missiles. Still, Israeli analysts leveled criticism at the news media and the government for fueling public panic.
“The Netanyahu government faced a complicated problem that required leadership abilities, courage and maturity,” wrote another respected columnist, Nahum Barnea, in Yediot Ahranot. “The results were embarrassing.”
Netanyahu, briefing the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, asserted that, despite the deal, Hussein will continue to develop his weapons of mass destruction and may choose again to restrict the movements of UN arms inspectors or expel them from the country.
Netanyahu defended the national mobilization of the army’s Home Front Command to prepare the public to deal with a potential attack of biological or chemical weapons. He said it was a timely exercise in preparedness.
“I have to say that in general the level of preparedness that has been achieved is something that we would like to maintain,” Netanyahu said. “I think we have learned a great deal and actually gained quite a bit of valuable experience in all the civil defense systems that have worked together . . .”
He reacted sharply to criticism in the Arab world that the U.S. applies a double standard in the region, failing to force Israel to adhere to UN resolutions to give back occupied Arab lands while threatening Iraq with military strikes for its resistence to UN arms monitors.
“Well, I don’t think there’s a double standard,” he told an impromptu news conference. “I think there’s an equal standard. (Hussein) is a ruthless dictator who used poison gas against his own people and has committed every possible form of aggression. The U.S. demands (his) compliance (with UN resolutions).
“In our case, we demand compliance from the Palestinians who promised to fight terror, the same terror that knows no bounds, that we seek to control . . . In this case, if you want to seek the question of compliance, look elsewhere.”
In a committee hearing, opposition Labor members of the Knesset and other lawmakers assailed Netanyahu for his handling of the crisis, promising to hold a no-confidence vote next week to censure the government. Labor Party Secretary Ra’anan Cohen said Netanyahu’s tactics have made Hussein “king of the Arabs” and weakened moderates like Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Jordan’s King Hussein.