CPJ protests banning of “Al-Quds al-Arabi”

Appeals To

His Excellency Hafez al-Asad

President of the Syrian Arab Republic

c/o Ambassador Walid al-Moualem

Embassy of the Syrian Arab Republic

2215 Wyoming Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20008

Fax: +202 234 9548

Please copy appeals to the source if possible.

An English translation of a column published in “Al-Quds al-Arabi” on 28
June 1999, which is believed to have triggered the newspaper’s banning in
Syria on 29 June, follows:

“Surprising Symptoms of a New Syria.”
By Abdel Bari Atwan
(“Al-Quds al-Arabi”, 28 June 1999)

Benjamin Netanyahu, the outgoing prime minister of the Hebrew state, is
leaving office after giving Ehud Barak a highly significant gift by
launching a bloody attack in Beirut and other Lebanese towns. This gift
reflects and magnifies Arab impotence as Lebanon and Syria begin peace
negotiations knowing that Barak will get what he wants without much effort.
I am not saying this to side with the Palestinians, as their position is
already bankrupt.

A meticulous analysis of the international and Arab reaction to the latest
Israeli attack against Lebanon may help the reader understand the current
situation as well as shed light on future developments. They are summarized
in the following points:

1) Israeli warplanes have repeatedly attacked Lebanese power stations in
al-Jumhour, south of Beirut, as well as Baalbek, without any resistance,
notably from the Syrian forces which are supposed to be in charge of
defending Lebanon, according to the treaty that legitimizes Syria’s presence
in Lebanon.

2) The Syrian political response to the attack was surprising, confusing and
disappointing. The Syrian media insisted on exonerating Barak, and held
Netanyahu fully responsible. This is despite the fact that Barak
collaborated directly or indirectly by stalling in forming a new cabinet,
and by failing to condemn the act strongly in public. I believe that
Netanyahu would not have taken this step and had the support of the army and
its generals, without a green light from Barak.

3) The attack has succeeded in damaging the Lebanese economy and increasing
the
suffering by cutting off electricity and water…and thereby inspiring
weak-spirited people to turn against the Islamic resistance in southern
Lebanon. Taken together, this will facilitate future negotiations with
Israel and could lead to a settlement and the eventual withdrawal of Israel
from Lebanon and the Golan Heights. Such a settlement would come at the
expense of Hezbollah and its heroic acts.

4) The attack has highlighted the lack of an Arabic response, on both the
popular and official levels. No demonstration has taken place in Lebanon,
nor in other Arab capitals, and the Arab countries have failed to offer
financial assistance for rebuilding the bridges and power stations destroyed
in the attack.

It is difficult to understand the Syrian position in particular regarding
the attack. Syria’s praise of Barak, prior to knowing his true character, is
confusing, especially given that for the past thirty years, Syria has
resorted to a more careful and meticulous analysis…before taking a position.

It should be noted that while Dr. Salim al-Hoss, prime minister of Lebanon,
was
blaming the attack on Barak and making no distinction between him and
Netanyahu,
the Syrian government was exonerating Barak, despite his bloody past in
terrorism against the Arab and despite the fact that he said “no” to
negotiations on occupied Jerusalem, “no” to the return of refugees, and “no”
to dismantling the settlements.

It begs the question: Has the Syrian government grown weary, like the PLO
and president Anwar al-Sadat? Has Syria decided to break away from its
previous stand of struggle and resistance…in order to get back its
territories and concentrate only on its own internal affairs?

What leads me to raise this question are signals coming out of Damascus:…the
hesitant opening towards Iraq, the cold treatment of other Arab states, the
negotiating with the Hebrew state through journalistic and commercial
channels…Syrian diplomacy is in a state of paralysis and total
stagnation…Thirty Syrian embassies including those in important capitals in
the world are without ambassadors.

Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak didn’t stop, as usual, in Damascus for
consultation and coordination prior to his current visit to Washington which
began yesterday. Also, Syria is the only country that has not sent a
representative to Tripoli to congratulate the Libyan leader for having the
embargo lifted. The Syrian foreign minister has not visited Baghdad and has
given no indication he will do so in the near future.

Syria is currently going through a transition, [as Dr. Bashar al-Assad seems
poised to replace his father, President Hafaz al-Assad]. This matter has
totally become a priority which determines…all of Syria’s actions.

The forced retirement of the leaders of the armed forces, the delay of
appointing ambassadors, and the attempt to move the peace forward as soon as
possible are laying the groundwork for this possible transition.

Briefly, we are awaiting a “new Syria” completely different from the one we
have
known for the past thirty or rather fifty years. It is too soon to make
clear judgment, or predict the nature of the new regime, or whether it would
be for the better or worse….

I believe that the Israeli attack on Beirut augers a new era both in Lebanon
and Syria, in which it is difficult for the Islamic resistance, or any other
resistance for that matter, to find a place. I don’t exaggerate by saying
that what happened to the Kurdish leader Abdallah Ocalan will be repeated to
Hezbollah in one way or another.

The Adana agreement between Syria and Turkey forced Ocalan to live in exile
all over the world; the new question is where a peace treaty between Syria
and Israel of Barak will force Hezbollah?