BRITAIN

BRITAIN
The Independent, London, Oct. 8: In his televised address last night from Cincinnati, President George Bush was aiming at three different audiences. The first was the group of mostly Democratic senators who threaten to oppose the resolution the president has sent to Congress. This defiance, if maintained, could deny Mr. Bush a show of unanimous domestic support for broad powers to go to war against Iraq support he wants in order to increase the pressure on the U.N. Security Council to pass a stern new resolution to permit the return of the weapons inspectors.
The second audience is the one beyond America's shores, whose doubts about the enterprise are reflected in the considerable difficulty the U.S. and Britain are encountering in their efforts to forge such a U.N. resolution. With his tone of unremitting belligerence, and his administration's scarcely masked contempt for the views of many of America's traditional friends and allies, Mr. Bush is perceived across much of the planet not as the benign and righteous American he perceives himself to be, but as the Ugly American.
Gung-ho for combat
Above all, however, this was a speech for the home front. Read the hawkish commentators and glance casually at the opinion polls and it would seem that the U.S. population is as gung-ho for combat as Messrs. Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld.
The truth, however, is less clear-cut. Read those polls more closely and you find that for all the Rumsfeldian swagger, a majority of Americans do not want to go it alone. They, like us, are deeply uneasy at one country launching an unprovoked attack on another. They, like us, worry about "the day after". Like the Democrat and Republican senators who balk at giving Mr. Bush the wide powers he seeks, many do not believe the president has made the case that Saddam Hussein represents so imminent a threat to U.S. security that he must be eliminated now, whatever it takes.
SWEDEN
Dagens Nyheter, Stockholm, Oct. 9: After September 11, it has been almost impossible to attack the president on foreign policy issues. And the effects are evident in the debate on Iraq. The Democratic Party, which under normal circumstances would have been pungent in its criticism against the Bush administration's plans, has kept a relatively low profile.
Rallying round Bush
They have certainly argued that the U.S.A. must exhaust all possibilities in the U.N. before a one-sided attack (on Iraq) can be carried out, but in the end they all seem to be rallying round the president. Therefore it is hardly surprising that many Democrats do not want anything else than that the debate in Congress about Bush's authority will come to an end.
After the President's speech and the expected decision in congress this week is getting closer to the point when the election campaign can begin, at least from their point of view, in earnest.
EGYPT
Egyptian Gazette, Cairo, Oct. 8: A close friend of Iraq since the demise of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, Russia keeps the world guessing on the side it will eventually take on the Iraq-U.S. standoff. A few days ago, Moscow sent conflicting signs. For one thing, it voiced readiness to consider any resolution to help U.N. arms inspectors do "effective work" in hunting for Iraq's alleged prohibited weapons. "If, for the work of the inspectors to be effective, we need new decisions, we will of course be prepared to consider them," said Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov.
U.S. assurances
The remark was interpreted that Moscow is softening its opposition to the American agenda on Iraq. But will Moscow eventually walk out on its closest regional ally? Unconfirmed media reports say that Russia has received reassurances from the U.S., which is seeking its approval for an anti-Iraq draft for an automatic use of force, that in the post-Saddam era Russia will have a foothold in Iraq.
Whether Moscow will fall for the American temptations or not will be clear in the fateful days ahead when the militarist U.S. draft is put on the table for veto at the U.N. Security Council.