NEWSWEEK’S Dan Ephron spoke to Amr Moussa, the Secretary General of the 22-nation Arab League, in Cairo this week about the sympathy many Arabs express for Americans over last week’s attacks but the anger they feel over Washington’s policies.
NEWSWEEK: There been an outpouring of sympathy in Egypt for American victims of the attacks but also expressions of anger at American policy. Why is that?
Amr Moussa: The links between the United States and the Arab countries, the Arab League, have been established for a long time, through cooperation and admiration that all of us have for the American achievements, the American way of life…. The negative point (has to do with Israel)…. When they see the Israelis doing all that they are doing to the Palestinians without being checked by the Americans that creates a certain feeling of frustration. But this should not be construed as if it means hatred. It means disappointment, disapproval, disagreement but not hatred.
You talk about a readiness to help and I think Washington is saying it wants not just condemnation but action, countries rooting out their own terrorist cells, not turning a blind eye to Islamic militants. What can the U.S. expect from Arab states?
It depends first on the result of the investigation and what the U.S. authorities have found.
Suppose the phone rings now and Secretary Powell tells you the United States has strong suspicions that Osama bin Laden is behind this and Afghanistan is harboring him and therefore Washington is about to launch a retaliatory attack. And in that phone call Secretary Powell asks you to issue a statement of support for the attack on behalf of the Arab League. How do you respond?
“We…would have to debate this and see whether this is the right thing that we would support or if we have another suggestion to make. Especially when you say strong suspicion, coupled with concrete military action, this should be considered very carefully. I would refer you to what President Mubarak, the president of Egypt, said some days ago. He said it’s better not to jump to conclusions and then divide the world into sympathizers and critics. So, I would say that such an action should command the approval of everybody before being taken.
What amount of evidence would be necessary to get key Arab allies on board?
I would say a reasonable amount of evidence. A reasonable amount of evidence would form a good basis for consultations. And this is important. Because an action is not [unilateral]…You have to take into consideration the feelings in this vast area of West Asia and this should be weighed. Here I would say that a reasonable amount of evidence would form a good basis for immediate discussions, consultations between the U.S. and the other countries.
What is a reasonable amount of evidence?
Well, that there is evidence that those people who perpetrated this attack were paid for by, supported by, trained by [certain groups], that it is a premeditated act started and coordinated, etc. All those things will have to be [shown]. Many people here in the Middle East believe that this operation was highly sophisticated and coordinated in a way that its perpetrators would not all be from a camp like Osama bin Laden’s-that there must be someone more in this coalition, other groups of people coming from several directions that put together an attack. Things like that should be clear.
What other groups would that be? Where would you begin if you were the investigator?
I really don’t know. It could be simple, very simple. But it could be very complicated.
What American response would outrage the Arab world?
I think President Mubarak has interpreted this very well when he said that jumping to conclusions and then acting on them would not be in the interests of the American image and the American support in the region.
You’re saying the United States should not operate unilaterally but first show evidence to other countries. What form would these consultations take?
Consultation doesn’t mean that we want to have conferences and meetings and committees and sub-committees. It’s a question of immediate and very quick kinds of consultations…The United States should not take any action that would depend only on a few countries…there should be a wide agreement [because] this is a long battle. This is not the last one [terrorist attack], I hope it is the last one but there are terrorist organizations all over the world. So this needs a coordinated action, not the action of only one country.
Why did this happen to the United States?
People are frustrated and in their minds the U.S. is responsible for everything that is going on in the world…. A state of agitation has engulfed the world vis-a-vis the new international order. I don’t call on the U.S. now to sit and assess, that’s not my point, but my point is the time for reassessment will come perhaps later on. But the general state of the world is conducive to a lot of opposition, frustration and violence that comes as a result of it.
When the time comes for reassessment, you seem to be saying that the first point will be greater American involvement in solving conflicts around the world.
The U.S. cannot be isolated from world policy, in particular in the regions where major problems exist. Just to let the Middle East go through this agony of an overwhelming power used by the Israelis against the Palestinians without intervention to redress the violence, this can’t continue, it shouldn’t continue.
Where does Israel fit in? You have said in the past that Israel’s actions against Palestinians sometimes amount to state-sponsored terrorism.
Yeah, we have been saying that, of course. But now, I want to concentrate on what happened to the United States. This is not the time to repeat what we said before. I do not want to be dragged to this territory.
But there will be Arabs in the Middle East certainly who will say any international coalition against terrorism should take on Israel.
Yes, because Israel is acting again, more, attacking Palestinians etc., adding a lot of oil to the fire and this works against what the U.S. wants to do, building up a coalition. Those actions by Israel would certainly adversely affect the policy of the United States.
