Arab views on Korean nukes

I wanted to write something about how the Arab media is discussing the North Korean nuclear test, but there really hasn't been all that much out there yet.    Maybe this is just because it takes Arab writers longer to come up with timely columns for whatever reason, maybe it's because of the famous insularity of the Arab public sphere.  The North Korean nuclear test has thus far generated a lot less debate than Gamal Mubarak's announcement that Egypt planned to ramp up its civilian nuclear program.  Whatever the case, thus far discussion is fairly muted and small scale.

Al-Quds al-Arabi's lead editorial today presents what is probably the default Arab attitude:  good for North Korea for challenging American hegemony.  Al-Quds argues that while North Korean nuclear capability surprised nobody, the real surprise was North Korean disregard for all of America's threats and warnings.  Al-Quds is most impressed with the absence of viable American options against North Korea - sanctions won't matter to its insular economy, there's no real military option, and American military power is anyway tied down in Afghanistan and Iraq.  It also makes the obligatory point about the hypocritical difference between American agitation over North Korean nukes and total silence about Israeli nukes.   Finally, al-Quds notes that Iranian officials must be pleased with these developments and are no doubt taking notes ... but warns Iran that it is in a far more dangerous situation than North Korea and shouldn't America will be as impotent or indifferent to Iranian nukes.

Lebanon's al-Akbhar is also all over the nuclear crisis.  Joseph Samaha writes that this comes as a distraction to a West which had been gearing up for confrontation with Iraq, until North Korea stole the headlines and the cameras.  He disagrees with those Arabs who think that an Asian nuclear explosion doesn't matter in the Middle East.  It's a major blow to the Non-Proliferation regime in general, he writes.  It will carry lessons about the costs of cutting off diplomacy, at a time when - according to Samaha - Rice's recent visit to the region did exactly that (meeting only with pro-American leaders to construct a front of Iran, rather than trying to negotiate with and talk to Iran).  Like al-Quds, he points to what this reveals about the emptiness of American threats, and about the strategic distraction of an America beset by crises on all sides.   His punchline is the key:  the United States responded to al-Qaeda by attacking Iraq... and, he suggests, will respond to North Korean by focusing on Iran. 

That's pretty much it by way of analysis, though.  Al-Sharq al-Awsat has basically nothing on the crisis - only a very short news article with no analysis.  Al-Hayat has two more substantive pieces, but both are straight news articles and not commentary. The first, from the UN, cast the tests as a great defeat for the 6 Powers who have tried to prevent North Korean nuclear proliferation.  The second looks at regional responses, with a particular eye towards how it will affect the Iranian situation.  The US is in a bind, this piece suggests, because a tough line against North Korea will distract attention from and reduce capabilities for dealing with Iran, but a weak line against North Korean may embolden Iran. 

Al-Jazeera's online news story is straightforward, without much added information or  analysis;  ditto for al-Arabiya.   North Korea is one of the four featured stories on al-Jazeera's main page, at least.   As for talk shows, the most recent transcript of al-Jazeera's main political program Behind the News is about prices during Ramadan;  I didn't have the chance to watch yesterday to see if Korea came up.   As for al-Arabiya, the top stories on its website right now are, in order,  the failure of Qatari mediation of Palestinian differences (emphasis on the Qatari failure, which is what really matters to al-Arabiya), Bashar al-Asad's call for peace negotiations with Israel, the announcement of the UAE's beauty pageant winner, speculation about the Nobel prize for literature, Coptic Church anger over Egypt's arrest of seven Christians, a Saudi royal amnesty for prisoners, controvery over the assassination of Anwar Sadat twenty-five years ago, the role of Iranian Jews in Israeli policy, a bunch of economic reports, and, finally, North Korea.

I assume that there will be more debate and discussion over the next few days, so I'll try and check back in on that as it develops. 

UPDATE:   As of now (2:20 PM) North Korea no longer appears as one of the first nine lead stories on al-Arabiya (it is relegated to one of the small subhead stories).  But it is one of the top headlines on al-Jazeera (although today's Behind the News focuses on the reports about the Baker Plan to salvage Iraq, not on North Korea).   The pattern is clear:  North Korea story is being highlighted in the more populist/Arab nationalist media (al-Jazeera, al-Quds al-Arabi, al-Akhbar) and downplayed in the Saudi/conservative media (al-Arabiya, al-Sharq al-Awsat).   This resembles the initial response to the Israel-Lebanon war, where there was a sharp initial split in the Arab media along almost exactly the same lines. 

Why would the Saudi / conservative media be downplaying the North Korea story, and the populist /Arabist media highlighting it?   My guess is that it's about Iran.  The Saudi / conservative media wants to keep the focus of international diplomacy on Iran - in keeping with the Condi Rice game plan from her visit last week - and not get sidetracked by North Korea.  The populist / Arabists want to see the focus shifted away from Iran, while also perhaps reveling in an evidently successful challenge to American hegemony.   Both sides may think that the North Korean nuclear test will embolden Iran... and disagree over whether they want that. 

Comments

[Aziz]

Bashar al-Asad's call for peace negotiations with Israel

uh, what? care to shed more light on that? first I've heard of it anywhere. Granted the US media is more focused on all things Foley and Korean at present. But that seems relatively important. Is Assad jumping aboard the old King Abdullah peace plan deal? or what?

[rami abdelrahman]

I think on the Arab street you can find one general overview:

Let North Korea have nuclear weapons:

It's an unjust world, all the countries that condone NK the most, are ones with the largest nuclear artilleries.

Here Id like to add that it is possible to buy nuclear warheads for a damn good price in central asia. Former USSR scientists do not ask for much. Look around, everyone has nukes now.

Arabs are more concerned with the nuclear artileries of Israel, the US, perhaps Iran and Pakistan.

STOP NORTH KOREA:

but stop everyone else too.

[upyernoz]

aziz,

i think mr. aardvark was referring to this

[Craig]

So shocking! :)

It will carry lessons about the costs of cutting off diplomacy

Yeah, but the funniest part is that North Korea made nuclear weapons after having accepted a deal from the Clinton Administration that is almost IDENTICAL to the deal teh Europeans are trying to offer to Iran.

The lesson is that diplomacy, with regimes like Iran and North Korea, is counter-productive.

We should write in blood, a language they understand.

[Craig]

Rami,

Look around, everyone has nukes now.

No they don't. We know that "everybody" doesn't have nukes, because Washington DC and New York still exist.

Wishful thinking on your part, I think. Why are arabs in such a hurry to die?

[Stephen]

Craig said: "Yeah, but the funniest part is that North Korea made nuclear weapons after having accepted a deal from the Clinton Administration..."

That's entirely wrong - this 2004 article has the history. In short, Clinton negotiated with NK and reached an agreement for removal of military-nuke stuff from NK. In return, the US would provide two light water reactors (they are entirely civilian), and relations would be normalised. The agreement was referred to the Republican controlled Congress for funding, and they said no.

If congress had said yes, all of that plutonium and the means of its production etc would have been removed eight years ago.

Imagine if Congress had said yes - no nukes in NK.

[Antithesis]

I've lost track of the number of times Craig has been proven factually wrong on these blog commentaries. Forget his opinions, good or bad: if the guy just typed a few key works on Wikipedia to fact check his assertions, then this site wouldn't be half as funny!

[Jamal]

About the only Jazeera I have time for these days is the morning news broadcast at breakfast, and the other day it was all North Korea and Asia for 15 of the 30 minutes of the broadcast. It certainly got wide coverage with commentary from Jazeera correspondents in Tokyo and Beijing. Also, check out the commentary along with the articles on the Jazeera site for a less formal set of reactions.

[Bart]

STOP israel genocidal etnic cleansing!!!! free palestina

[Gadi (a Jew that should be extinct, from Israel)]

I am a Jew living in Israel.
I don't think there is a future in this area.
The sooner Iran attacks Nuclear on Israel, the better.
I don't think any of us Jews and Arabs living in this area should exist after this attack.
Let's just hope that they will turn all Jerusalem (including East Jerusalem - of course) and all the mosques (el Omar, El Aqsa) into garbage piles, and all of us too.
If they miss, the country is so small, that all West Bank should become radioactive and Arab and Jewish mutants would reside there. (three ears, one hand etc...)
Nuclear is delicious, it is good sense. I guess Israel will bomb all the Persian Gulf with it's hundreds of oil wells, turning the region to the biggest furnace in the Universe after the Big Bang.
Don't we miss the Big Bang? Mmmmmm let's all support Iran and North Korea, the Radical Totalirism countries for Nuclear Bombs.
I'm glad my country is so small (in some areas 15 km from border to border) so that Jordan will be radioactive too.... mmmmmm good! Good world! Let's carry on supporting AchmadineeJad to have Nuclear bombs!

[laser]

The facts are clear and simple. Iran and North Korea are despotic nations who either possess or wish to possess weapons that could send the rest of us back into the Stone Age. Responsible nations must see to it that such a capability is denied to these two countries. And very soon!

[I. Fang]

It seems as if "the people" has lost their power. Evil people are becoming heads of states and taking the power from the people - turning it against their people for oppression and self destruction. It is like that in NK, in Iran, in Russia, in Israel, in Palestine and in many other parts of the world.
External intervention (such as the US) is not solving these crisis situations as the local people are not organized and unified to bring better future to themselves (see Iraq and Afghanistan).
It has been a century since the last real people revolution. I hope the next one is soon to arrive.

[Vicki Liu]

I hope China and Japan do something about North Korea. The guy is crazy and he wants to remain in power. The ones who will suffer the most are the people of North Korea. I hope they will have the strength to get rid of their despotic leader(not fit to be one)!!!!

[Issac Issa]

Israel should lead by example and get rid of all their nuclear weapons 1st. If Israel does not stop abusing, raping, killing and oppressing the Palestians they should have sanctions placed on them. Free Palestine!! Long live Ahmdinnejad long live the Hezzbollah freedom fighters!!
I believe there should be one state for both Muslims and Jews to live together in peace and harmony, why is it zionist are to stupid to act on this?
For centuries muslims and Jews lived happily together in Palestine until apartheid Israel was created.
It is time the us Jews done the right thing!!!

[shalom deveid]

I am a Jew living in Israel but I hate my goverment because of killing a lot of Palestians every day
Israel should lead by example and get rid of all their nuclear weapons 1st.