Most recently, the Arab media including AL AKHBAAR and Al AHRAM, two leading newspapers in Cairo presented a very "special" Arab point of view and scenario of the Sinai bombings. It is intriguing and amusing to learn how editorials in leading Arab publications interpret and explain terrorism and bombings caused by their compatriots. Publicly, and in English, the editorials appear to be siding with the United States, and encouraging perpetual peace with Israel. However, if we read the texts in Arabic, the whole story and whole intentions of the Arabs change drastically. According to AL AHRAM, the Sinai bombings presented Sharon with an opportunity to further marginalize the Palestinian cause. The Egyptian media reports that Sharon will exploit the bombings with relish. Furthermore, Arab editorials argue that Israel's Gaza rampage was not just a response to the firing of Qassam missiles. It does not mean that Arabs have to subscribe to claims that Israel needs no excuse for its actions. Arab Media Commentaries: " You cannot impose a unilateral solution to a conflict without recourse to extraordinary levels of violence." A verbatim translation of selected articles and comments in the Arab media goes like this: " The latest Israeli incursion into Gaza was not unrelated to the rudimentary weapon -- missile is perhaps too grand a term for these devices -- Gazans have developed to fight the situation into which they have been thrust, a situation, unprecedented in modern history, that essentially locks a million and a half people into a prison with two gates. Israeli violence in Gaza, in Jenin and Nablus, is structurally integral to the problems of disengagement -- you cannot impose a unilateral solution to a conflict without recourse to extraordinary levels of violence. And this is alarming, for, despite all the peace efforts deployed by Israel to bring peace to the region, Arab media, constantly undermines those efforts and Israel's intentions and the possibility of peace negotiations with Arab countries, particularly Syria. The October's general message conveyed by the Arab Media in Egypt, Syria, Sudan, Yemen and Lebanon as published on the very front page of their leading publications goes like this: "Unlike the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon where a sovereign state claimed control and responsibility on the evacuated areas, the issue in Gaza is not just one of unilateral withdrawal, but of redeployment on conditions Israel believes will consolidate its control over areas of the West Bank. It hopes to control Gaza with less friction from the outside and annex parts of the West Bank while at the same time improving its international standing and alleviating international pressures to engage in a settlement process Israel neither wants nor can engage in given its current leadership and the state of public opinion." Several commentaries and articles appeared in AL AHRAM stated that it is the Qassam missiles, though, that have thrown into relief Israel's threadbare justifications for the construction of the security wall and unilateral disengagement. The wall cannot hold even against such a primitive weapon. Israel is perfectly aware that after the redeployment of the Israeli troops the occupants of Gaza will never accept their fate as prisoners, will not accept an occupation at arm's length from the other side of a wall, certainly not in the absence of even the promise of a just settlement and a resolution to the question of Palestinian national sovereignty. "Conducting a survey among so-called moderate Arab scholars and political leaders, the common Arab belief is that Israel is not taken in by its hollow demagoguery about the culture of "terrorism". It is perfectly aware of the causes and knows exactly what to expect. It will make every attempt to minimize the possibility of Palestinian reaction, by using all its military capacities to produce a climate of fear.

Quite often, Arab leaders and especially the Egyptians publicly wash their hands from violent measures taken by the Palestinians. Even, the Palestinians upon meeting with high level aides at The White House, denounce terrorism acts. But their public statements as published in the Arab media are quite different. Some messages and commentaries are regularly reinforced and elaborated upon by editors in the Arab media.  For instance, political analysts at AL JAZERRA, AL AKBAAR, AL SAFIR and AL AHRAM stated that regardless of their positions vis-à-vis the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, the Palestinian factions maintain good relations with Egypt and want to keep it that way. If asked, the factions would all reply that only harm could come from attempting to rock the economic or political stability of Egypt. More importantly, Palestinian political organizations have made it clear that they will not target Israeli citizens abroad. Disengaging from violence of any sort against civilians in nations outside Palestine was a wise decision, in spite of the fact that the Israelis have not responded in kind. The editorial included this irrational interpretation of political analysis. It goes like this: " The Sinai bombings offer Sharon an historic opportunity to promote tighter security coordination in the region and provide a justification for linking security coordination with economic and political interests. The response of Egyptian public opinion to the Luxor attacks of 1994 was sufficiently vehement to alter the course of fundamentalist violence, compelling many organizations to modify their thinking. If this was the case when the perpetrators were Egyptian, imagine the reaction when such attacks are linked to non-Egyptian groups?

HOW THE ARAB MEDIA EXPLAIN THE REACTION OF ARABS AND EGYPTIAN PUBLIC

CLIMATE OF WEARINESS

PRAISING THE US AND ISRAEL-ARAB PEACE EFFORTS  IN OFFICIAL MEETINGS, WHILE ATTACKING THE US AND ISRAEL IN THEIR ARAB NEWSPAPERS

Several editorials in the Arab press in Lebanon, Syria and Egypt wrote that there was a time when Arabs  spoke about American phases in the region. There was a Truman phase, a Kissinger phase, a Carter phase and a Baker phase. Perhaps Arabs  should now talk of a Sharon phase, a phase of Israeli schemes and projects. Its most salient features are to be found in the military and political structures and operations required to marginalize the Palestinian cause, even in the Arab world, making the disengagement plan the only available alternative, with no roadmaps or even detours. The Arab media is  placing a strong emphasis on the so-called "Israeli phase". Several commentaries on the front page of major Arab newspapers  characterized the "Israeli Phase"  as a series of  attempts to internationalize the Congress approved boycott of Syria.

ARAB FALSIFICATIONS OF FACTS AND INTENTIONS OF ISRAEL

The overwhelming number of  articles published in the Arab media between October 1st and October 18Th,  and geared toward distorting the intention of Israel added more confusion in the mind of ordinary Arab citizens.  Editorials and articles in Arab Gulf area and Middle East newspapers claimed that Israel has no intention -whatsoever- to bring peace to the region. One particular statement caught my attention. It was published in Al AHRAM newspaper and posted on their website. It goes like this: " If Syria really wants peace, Israel says, it must demonstrate this "in deeds, not in words". At the same time, and without batting an eyelash, Israel refuses to negotiate with Syria because negotiations could only result in Israel withdrawing to pre-June 1967 borders. Israel puts about the false claim that Syria is begging on its knees for Israel to negotiate, then turns up its nose at the imagined entreaties, all the better to swagger and strut and play the bully shoving aside pedestrians on the sidewalk. But Syria has made no new overtures of any sort: it has merely reiterated its commitment to previously stated positions on a settlement and on the negotiating process.

UNDERSCORING THE BALANCE OF POWER