>More than anything else, Falluja has become a galvanizing battle, a
>symbol around which many Iraqis rally their anticolonial sentiments.
>Some say the fighting there exposes the lie of American justice by
>showing that the world's sole superpower is ready to avenge the
>killings and mutilation of four American security contractors by
>sending marines to shell and invade a city of 300,000 people.
Financial Times - April 22, 2004
MIDDLE EAST & AFRICA: US handling of Israel and Iraq stokes anger in Arab world By Roula Khalaf Financial Times; Apr 22, 2004
As the cameras lingered on the bloodied body of Abdel Aziz Rantissi, leader of the radical Palestinian Hamas group, Arab officials and commentators lined up on satellite television to denounce Israel's weekend assassination and accuse the US of having authorised the killing.
But the chorus of indignation did not stop in the Gaza Strip, where Rantissi was hunted down. Those interviewed moved on to rail against the Bush administration's policies in Iraq. Islamists pledged that the resistance to occupation in both Iraq and Palestine would prevail and destroy the American-Israeli axis.
After weeks of the most violent unrest in Iraq and dramatic American concessions to Israel, the Middle East's two crises seem to be merging in the minds of many Arabs.
Reacting to the troubles in Iraq, the United Arab Emirates' al-Khaleej newspaper claimed earlier this month that a new Israel was emerging at the very heart of the Arab world.
"Apache freedom, Apache democracy, and an Apache regime" are all that the Bush administration has given Iraq so far, said al-Khaleej, referring to the US attack helicopter of the same name. It accused the US president of "a literal emulation of the same Apache methods" used by Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.
The growing perceptions of a co-ordinated American-Israeli policy to force an Arab capitulation, particularly with regard to the Palestinian cause, damage further America's already troubled image in the region.
Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian president, told French daily Le Monde on Tuesday that Arabs had never harboured as much hatred towards the US.
The sense among Arabs that the region is fighting the same war on two fronts also complicates the Bush administration's relations with Arab allies and its attempts to market its "Greater Middle East initiative", a policy of social and political reforms that has already aroused suspicions among the region's governments and public opinion.
US officials complain that Arab media have fed the confusion between Iraq and Palestine, particularly in promotional clips that alternate between pictures of Palestinians and Iraqis.
"There's also a big explosion in both places. It makes it easier for our critics and more difficult for us. But you cannot compare the two," says a US official. "Iraq is a limited occupation and it's in a political transition to sovereignty. The Israeli occupation is a conflict where the dispute is over land."
But the linkage between the two crises is partly created by the Iraqi insurgents.
When four American contractors were killed and mutilated in Falluja, responsibility was claimed by a previously unknown group calling itself the "Brigades of Martyr Ahmed Yassin" - the spiritual leader of the Palestinian Hamas who was killed last month in an Israeli air strike in Gaza.
"This is a gift from the people of Falluja to the people of Palestine," said the group in a statement.
Meanwhile, Moqtada al-Sadr, the Shia cleric who turned violently against the US this month, has described himself as part of the "real Islamic unity" created by Lebanon's Hizbollah and the Palestinian Hamas.
"I want them to accept me as their striking arm in Iraq, as necessity and opportunity dictate," he declared this month.
The problem for the US, moreover, is that the actions of American forces and the images they create are stronger than the political differences between the two occupations.
The US lashed out at Al-Jazeera, the Qatar based satellite broadcaster, accusing it of outright lies in its reporting from Falluja. But the US allies on the Iraqi Governing Council and witnesses have also described the battles in Falluja as collective punishment.
Last week's US decision to give a more prominent role to the UN in Iraq and the announcement by Lakhdar Brahimi, the UN envoy, of the structure of the sovereign government that will take over on June 30, should have been welcomed by the Arab world. But these moves were overshadowed by Mr Bush's press conference with Ariel Sharon.
In a dramatic policy shift that infuriated the Arab world, Mr Bush endorsed Israel's attempt to retain large West Bank settlements built on occupied Palestinian land as well as Israel's rejection of the right of return of Palestinian refugees to homes within the Jewish state. The US move led King Abdullah of Jordan to postpone a planned meeting with President George W. Bush this week.
In theory, the June 30 handover of sovereignty in Iraq should contribute to separating the two crises in the minds of Arabs. "To call it resistance to occupation in Iraq doesn't make sense - the occupation ends on June 30," says a US official.
The choice of Mr Brahimi, a former Algerian foreign minister, to plan the Iraqi transition could also shape a better image of the US presence in Baghdad.
But with continued, if not reinforced US troops in Iraq long beyond the transition date and still strong American influence on the way the country is governed, the US will find it difficult to convince the Arab world that the occupation has really ended.