Despite the absence of any proof of attempts to disrupt this

Despite the absence of any proof of attempts to disrupt this year's general election, the recent discovery of five bombs in Medan Mall, North Sumatra, and the explosives blast in Cimanggis in the West Java town, Depok, indicate the possibility of security disturbances in the run-up to the elections.

The Medan bombs in Medan and Cimanggis explosion should remind us of a similar series of terror acts toward the end of the New Order and the beginning of President Megawati Soekarnoputri's administration.

The spreading of terror through bombs seems to be an effective way of creating public restlessness, nervousness and anxiety.

Such a situation will certainly cause instability and turmoil, which could reduce public trust in the government and the security apparatus.

However, in the midst of campaigning and preparations for the elections, the public is in desperate need of security and stability because these are the keys to the success of the elections.

Thus, Bisnis Indonesia shares Indonesian Police chief Gen. Da'i Bachtiar's belief that certain parties are trying to disrupt this year's general elections.

Hence, any such attempt must be anticipated and prevented.

Within this context, the security apparatus must tighten security, and all elements of society must try to help make the election a success. -- Bisnis Indonesia, Jakarta

Violence and campaigning

People's premonitions are usually spot-on. Political party rallies resulted in severe traffic congestion in several parts of South Jakarta on Tuesday.

Jl. Diponegoro, Central Jakarta, was also "occupied" by thousands of supporters of a political party for hours, causing serious traffic problems in Menteng.

In the East Java town, Kediri, a pregnant woman had to be hospitalized after she fell off her motorbike in hectic traffic as hundreds of supporters of two political parties sped around on motorbikes from two opposing directions.

In Denpasar, Bali, and some other areas, supporters of different parties came close to brawling.

All of this is far from people's expectations, in which hopes have been expressed that campaigning will be both well-behaved and peaceful.

Leaders of political parties should be aware that campaigning is simply a means to assist parties in achieving their final objective. The presidential election is also the means to identify the best leader for the country. Therefore, political campaigning should not be carried out in a brutal way. To achieve its objectives it should be carried out properly.

Street rallies will start next week, and concern about an escalation of violence may be well-founded.

We just hope that the political parties will employ more civilized campaigning methods.

-- Republika, Jakarta

The death of Yassin

Whatever Yassin's death was meant to achieve, its symbolism is disastrous for Israel. Did Mr. Sharon and his advisers consider how the spectacle of helicopter gunships rocketing an old man in a wheelchair outside his mosque would appear to the world? Did they intend to turn this merchant of death into a victim - the Palestinian equivalent of Leon Klinghoffer? Despite intensive efforts to improve Israel's image abroad, and despite sympathy for victims of suicide bombings (most recently in Ashdod), the Jewish state now looks more isolated than ever. Like Napoleon's decision to execute the Duc d'Enghien, which transformed his image from that of a liberator into that of a tyrant, Sharon's decision to execute Yassin is worse than a crime: It is a blunder.

-- The Daily Telegraph, London

The killing of Hamas leader

Israel has to be reined in. Its violent and increasingly irrational actions are ratcheting the situation to a fever pitch.

The assassination of Sheik Ahmed Yassin marks a new and unprecedented escalation. Needless to say, it will push any hopes of a resumption of negotiations well out of the picture and, in the meantime, the military wings of Hamas and all the other Palestinian factions will redouble their efforts at retaliation. A cycle of violence will ensue that may reach hitherto untouched levels.

This is in no one's interest except, perhaps, the Israeli prime minister's. In fact, it may be argued that (Ariel) Sharon is in win-win position. By assassinating Yassin, he has shown the loony right in Israel that he is a "tough" leader ahead of any possible withdrawal from Gaza.

By provoking the inevitable retaliation, he can retrospectively justify to a toothless West the need for even harsher military action, and postpone indefinitely, if he should choose, such a withdrawal.

It is time for the international community, spearheaded by the United States, to step in no uncertain terms.

Washington must start to realize that for as long as the Israeli government is allowed to act with complete impunity, without respect for international law or human life, nothing, not in the Palestinian-Israeli sphere, nor at a regional level, will change.

-- The Jordan Times, Amman, Jordan

The wisdom of an Iraq war

A former White House coordinator of anti-terrorist efforts, Richard Clarke, charges that the Bush administration paid too much attention to Iraq and not enough to al-Qaeda. One can quibble about who said what when, but overthrowing Saddam Hussein was clearly the administration's first priority right from the start.

Joining former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, Clarke is the second administration insider to report that President Bush started pushing and planning for an invasion of Iraq soon after he was inaugurated. Clarke further alleges that after 9/11, Bush ordered him to try to link Saddam to the terrorist attacks.

The White House maintains that President Bush early on wanted a strategy to eliminate al-Qaeda. Either he did not get such a strategy, or the strategy has not worked. ...

The question that remains is not whether Clarke's allegations are accurate in every detail. His is only one side of the debate. The overriding question is whether the United States' war on terror has benefited in some measurable way from the war in Iraq. So far, the answer is no.

-- Houston Chronicle, Houston, Texas

The presidential race

At the rate that President Bush and John Kerry have been duking it out lately with personal and nasty exchanges, the 2004 presidential campaign could wear out voters long before the Nov. 2 election.

The kind of in-your-face sniping that's been occurring lately is usually seen in the fall as Election Day nears. At this point, eight months out, the candidates typically are busy raising campaign funds and staking out their positions.

It's obvious that both camps have concluded that it's more important to go on the offensive and let no assertion by the other side go unchallenged...

OK. There's more than a grain of truth in the back and forth. Still, the candidates need to talk more about the future. There's no shortage of critical issues: Iraq, the Middle East, the economy, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and homeland security top the list.

Enough of the "Liar, liar, pants on fire" sniping. Voters deserve better.

-- The Democrat & Chronicle, Rochester, New York

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Guardian, London, on the killing of Hamas leader:

... Mr. Sharon may feel that "the gates of hell" have been opened before, and Israel has survived. The same calculation looks very different from the point of view of the Palestinian militants. The response they will unleash on Israel is bound to be qualitatively different. A total of 62 Palestinians have been killed in the last month by Israeli action in the Gaza and the West Bank, many of them Hamas. But Sheikh Yassin was different. ...

The question, as always is, why and why now? The dissenting voice in the Israeli cabinet, Interior Minister Avraham Poraz, said that Yassin had not been a "ticking bomb." Ahmed Qureia, the Palestinian prime minister, claimed Yassin was a "moderating" influence within Hamas and that his murder opened the door wide to chaos. If Yassin was being a "moderating" influence when he encouraged young Palestinian women to follow the example of a 22- year-old Palestinian mother of two who blew herself up at a checkpoint in Gaza killing four Israelis, then it would be good to know what course an immoderate Hamas leader would advocate.

But with the death of Shanab and, to a lesser extent, Yassin, Hamas lost the two leaders associated with the emerging de facto Islamist acquiescence of a two-state solution: the acceptance of 22 percent of historical Palestine as an interim solution and the deferment of the armed struggle against Israel to "future generations." The timing of Yassin's assassination is also unclear. He lived openly in Gaza and could have been killed any time in the last five years. What does Israel gain from killing him now? Does it truly believe that beheading Hamas will make a pullout from Gaza easier? Or is Mr. Sharon playing to a domestic audience, acting as the bulldog of Israel, when in fact he is about to make (in Israeli terms only) a large territorial concession? ...

The answer is that everything is wrong with targeted assassinations if, as Peace Now says, the effect is to pour barrels of petrol on a fire that is already out of control. In the 1980s Israel supported Hamas, when it was the fledgling cultural movement countering Yasser Arafat's secular Palestine Liberation Organization. Israel will one day have to negotiate with the enemy it helped create, but that day, after yesterday's killings, is further away than ever. [

[

The News-Press, Fort Myers, Florida, on saving the Hubble Space Telescope:

Since NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe announced two months ago that the Hubble Space Telescope would be allowed to die an early death, the space agency has been flooded with demands that the telescope be saved.

We agree with the critics and hope you will add your voice to those urging that the decision at least be reconsidered. The maintenance mission needed to keep Hubble running should be restored to the NASA agenda if it can be done in time and safely, perhaps robotically instead of by a space shuttle crew.

One reason for the outpouring of feeling is that Hubble is seen by many space devotees as the most productive NASA project in years. As late as last week, Hubble was still sending back thrilling images from deep space, images that tantalize scientists with possible answers to the origin of the universe.

Consigning Hubble to the dustbin at this exciting time, while pushing expensive and problematic missions such as a manned return to the moon or a voyage to Mars, is absurdly wrong- headed. ...

---

---

--- The Gazette, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, on civil union and same-sex marriage:

The distinction between a religious marriage and a legal union, unfortunately, has been lost. If more people understood the difference - indeed if the word "marriage" weren't used to describe two different statuses - the controversy over gay marriage might not be as heated as it is today.

As we see it, marriage is the business of the church, synagogue, mosque or other religious institution. Each religion and each division within religions should decide what level of commitment between what kinds of people represents a holy union. ...

So, what is the business of government in the union of two people? If it took no role at all in traditional marriage, the government could still define a civil union and bestow upon such a union whatever rights and responsibilities the government found appropriate...

With their authority, states will vary on the issue of same- sex marriages, some granting full marriage rights to gays, some allowing a union with fewer rights and some banning homosexual couples from any type of state-sponsored union. ...

Just as people may flee the Catholic or Episcopal church because doctrines conflict with their personal beliefs, so let people flee Massachusetts or Virginia if they don't like the permissive or restrictive codes of the state. ... ---

Pensacola News Journal, Pensacola, Florida, on wavering U.S. support in Iraq:

By now President Bush must know the United States is in trouble around the world. Recent events involving Poland, South Korea and Spain make it crystal clear.

The White House has to understand that this isn't just about the usual resentment of American power and influence, and that some serious fences need mending.

Meanwhile, our allies should not lose sight of the greater imperative. Free nations have to stand strong against terrorism and totalitarianism, no matter what other differences they might have. ...

Why this lack of support from these free nations, each of which democratically elects its leaders?

Mostly, it is the mistakes of the Bush administration. The war revealed no WMD, no connection between Iraq and al-Qaida, and that the United Nations inspectors were effective in suppressing Iraq's WMD programs.

U.S. prestige is on the line: What these nations are saying is that they don't believe or trust the White House. Given that these are our friends, the problem is obvious.

GetAP 1.00 -- MAR 26, 2004 02:13:50 ;AP; ANPA ..r.. Editorial Roundup By The Associated Press= JP/

By The Associated Press=

Here are excerpts from editorials in newspapers around the world:

Asahi Shimbun, Tokyo, on the killing of Hamas leader:

Peace has even less of a chance in the Middle East after Israeli missiles on Monday killed Sheik Ahmed Yassin, founder of the militant group Hamas, in the Gaza Strip, the Palestinian self-autonomous region.

Why did Israel kill him now? Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has given up hope of a negotiated peace with the Palestinians and suggested a unilateral dismantling of Jewish settlements in Gaza. It appears that he planned to crush the Hamas movement before Israel pulls out of the settlements and thus eliminate the threat of terror.

But exactly the opposite is likely to result from this killing. All Yassin's death will do is add fuel to the fire.

The Sharon government characterizes the attack on Palestinians as part of the fight against terror, which it presses ahead together with the United States. On the other hand, it also says it aims at coexistence with a Palestinian state. But will responding to terror with terror lead to reconciliation?

The situation is grave. This endless cycle of violent retaliation must be shut down. Concrete action should be taken promptly for effective intervention through the United Nations Security Council. ---

Straits Times, Singapore, on international support for the U.S. occupation of Iraq:

The failure to find WMD (in Iraq) has severely harmed U.S. credibility. Washington's unwillingness to admit it was wrong has worsened matters. The Western alliance, badly divided in the run- up to the war, has since drifted further apart. One of America's strongest allies, Poland's President Aleksander Kwasniewski said last week that he had been "misled" about Iraq's WMD, and that Polish troops might be withdrawn from the country next year. The new Spanish leader has threatened to do the same, unless the United Nations is given a significant role in Iraq by June 30, when an interim Iraqi government is due to be installed. The U.S. is still supported by many countries - including Singapore, Japan and South Korea from Asia - but public opinion in most countries has turned against America and its occupation of Iraq seems to have become a new recruiting tool for Islamic terrorist groups.

The top priority now is to deny these groups a beachhead in Iraq. Whatever the merits or demerits of war a year ago, the U.S. cannot withdraw until Iraq is stabilized. Indeed, the force strength it has in the country now - 130,000 troops, soon to be reduced to 110,000 - is woefully inadequate. But it is not going to get more troops unless the U.N. gains a greater say in Iraqi affairs. Washington's reluctance to cede real authority to the world body has prevented many countries, especially Muslim ones, from sending peacekeeping troops. With the June 30 deadline looming, Washington should do what it didn't a year ago: Involve the world. --- Clarin, Buenos Aires, Argentina, on global warming:

Environmental degradation is one of the consequences of a lack of planned economic development. Emissions of greenhouse gases, coupled with deforestation, have triggered a growing global warming trend. ... yet most industrialized nations still show no signs of seriously limiting their gas emissions despite the emergence of growing environmental concerns. The main air purifier for earth's atmosphere is the Amazon, but this lung is now severely threatened. Scientists estimate that the Amazon will lose 15 percent of its territory by 2020, owing to logging and increased agriculture ... Rational methods of exploiting these natural resources must be put in place, along with international accords to safeguard the environment. Until then, these trends will continue unchecked, imperiling many life forms until human beings are increasingly affected. [ Liberation, Paris, U.S. President Bush:

Could Bush be 'Aznarized'? Will the election make him pay for playing with the truth? ...

In a country in a state of war, citizens' confidence in their president, in his honesty, and above all, in his competence, counts more than ever. Now the question ... is simple: By claiming to fight terrorism with a war against Saddam Hussein's dictatorship, did Bush and his administration miss their target? And worse, did they deceive their citizens and allies? ...

It is not good for Bush that more and more Americans are asking themselves if he was seriously mistaken - a question the rest of the world has already asked - or if he lied.

[

Neue Zuercher Zeitung, Zurich, Switzerland, on the killing of Hamas leader:

To be perfectly clear: the slaying of Hamas leader Sheik Yassin will not bring the Israeli-Palestinian conflict one iota closer to a reasonable solution. But the victim of this Israeli rocket attack doesn't deserve any special pity. Yassin was the ideological head of a bloodthirsty terror organization which by its own admission doesn't want a compromise peace with Israel, but the elimination of this state at least in the long term. ...

"Like any other internationally recognized country, Israel naturally has the right to defend itself against terrorist attacks. But it is an entirely different question whether the Sharon government is using the appropriate means in this battle. ...

Why wasn't an attempt made to arrest Sheik Yassin ... and try him in an Israeli court? Such a procedure would have brought more honor to a state under the rule of law ... than a so-called extrajudicial killing. ...

Sharon has promised tirelessly since his election over three years ago that he would root out the hydra of Palestinian terror. ... But what has been achieved? ... More dead and wounded through terror and military violence than ever before - including many innocent civilians on both sides. ...

[

Dagbladet, Oslo, Norway, on the killing of Hamas leader:

The spiral of violence in the Middle East sped up when rockets from Israeli helicopters killed Sheik Ahmed Yassin, the founder and ideological leader of the Palestinian organization Hamas. Most suicide bombers who have taken young Israelis and innocent bus passengers with them in death were recruited by Hamas ... but the suspected organizers must be brought to trial, not liquidated.

Israel embraces international laws in principle but Israel's violations ... have become more frequent, more obvious and much coarser after Ariel Sharon was elected prime minister.

The murder will not weaken Hamas, and only gave then a new martyr. There will not be fewer terror attacks now, but probably more, harder and more comprehensive ... and that undermines any chance of a negotiated settlement. We think that is the key motive for the liquidation. Ariel Sharon does not want a negotiated settlement. He thinks he can get more by using military might.

[

Svenska Dagbladet, Stockholm, Sweden, on the killing of Hamas leader:

It is not hard to understand Israel's will to strike against those who want to annihilate the country. However, it is unacceptable to regularly issue and execute death sentences without a previous trial.

Israel would have much more to gain from catching and convicting rather than killing those who are responsible for terrorism. For (Israeli Prime Minister) Ariel Sharon, the death of the Hamas leader is a big political success. Whether what has happened is also good for Israel is an entirely different matter.

Hamas will respond by sending new suicide bombers, but the organization is possibly so weakened that the reaction becomes quite lame, after all. Meanwhile, the hatred against Israel among Palestinians has strengthened. The Sheik's death can also have repercussions by inspiring Muslim terrorists in Europe and the United States to new attacks.

To move ahead in the long term, different policies are needed to those that Sharon manages to pursue. But the same is of course true for the Palestinian side; the chance for peace has existed, but (Palestinian leader) Yasser Arafat hasn't taken it.

[

ThisDay, Johannesburg, South Africa, on the killing of Hamas leader:

And so here we are again, contemplating the way forward for a state that has - in defiance of world opinion - continued to stoke its own funeral pyre and now threatens to drag the whole of the Middle East down with it ...

What now? Hamas will surely send in more suicide bombers, who will strike the only target within their range: Israeli civilians. Israel will send in its own killers and continue to punish the Palestinian people for their resistance. An eye for an eye.

But Israel should know by now that of all possible permutations towards peace, murdering Palestinian figures is the least likely to yield a solution.

The attempts of Israel and its most dogmatic supporters to paint all criticism of its actions as resurgent anti-Semitism will not wash. Indeed, if today the most risky place in the world to be a Jew is within Israel, it is largely the fault of the political and military course pursued by Ariel Sharon and company.

Israelis and Palestinians sorely need to grow a new political leadership that can begin to carve out peace in a single democratic society. The divided solutions of the present and the past are a dead end, not a road map. [ Trouw, Amsterdam, Netherlands, on the killing of Hamas leader:

Israeli Premier Ariel Sharon has developed his own unilateral peace plan after the "roadmap" developed by the United States and others broke down. He plans to pull out of the Gaza Strip next year and wants to leave with a show of force, so he had Ahmed Yassin, the spiritual leader of Hamas, killed. Yassin is not a man to mourn, but assassination as a means of politics must be rejected. Some would argue that it causes fewer civilian deaths, but we fear that a greater number of leaders will rise in Yassin's place and the violence will only escalate. Furthermore it's a black mark for Israel. A constitutional democracy must force itself to combat the insanity of terrorism by the rule of law. The eye-for-an-eye strategy of both Israelis and Palestinians in recent months extinguishes any hope of movement toward peace. [ De Telegraaf, Amsterdam, netherlands, on the killing of Hamas leader:

It's true that the assassination of Ahmed Yassin was against international law and contradicts Israel's own laws. But it can't be forgotten that that this man had blood on his hands, and he was a terrorist. He bore responsibility for the many suicide attacks in Israel that killed so many innocent civilians in a gruesome manner. He blocked every attempt to make peace between Israel and Palestine. With his poisonous behavior, he marginalized the peace movement in Israel. He refused to recognize Israel's right to exist, something that is guaranteed by the international community. All this should be said along with any condemnation. Israel's action won't deescalate conflict in the Middle East, but that's as much the fault of the Palestinians as of Israel.

[

The Egyptian Gazette, Cairo, Egypt, on Israel's terrorism:

Israel's killing of Sheik Ahmed Yassin, the founder of the Palestinian Islamic movement Hamas, was designed to undermine Palestinians' spirit of resistance. The Jewish state should expect just the opposite.

Though "marked for death" as a senior Israeli official said Monday, the wheelchair-bound Yassin was a potent symbol of Palestinians' resolve to regain their rights. His assassination is turning him into a timeless hero not only for the Palestinians, but for many in the Muslim nation.

Yassin, 66, was killed in an Israeli airstrike as he left a mosque after dawn prayers in Gaza. Israeli media reports said Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has personally supervised the bid on Yassin's life. By acting like this, Sharon, whose only claim to fame is a long list of gory acts, has buffed his image as a ruthless tactician and an advocate of "state terrorism."

Yassin's physical disappearance is most likely to radicalize more Palestinians, especially young people. When a regular army like Israel's targets a frail old man like Yassin, what do the Israelis anticipate in return? His slaying has galvanized different Palestinian factions into declaring national unity and vowing revenge "like an earthquake. [ MORE[

GetAP 1.00 -- MAR 26, 2004 02:13:37