While many newspapers saw the holding of local elections in Syria as a sign of confusion, Syrian newspapers hailed it as a positive move toward reform. However, the editorial of the Saudi political daily Al-Watan said the Syrian regime was acting in a manner with no rhyme or reason. Holding local elections was further proof of the complete separation between the regime and the situation on the ground. Syria wanted to hold local elections at a time when killing and terrifying citizens continue, protests are held on a daily basis and recent all-out civil disobedience has started, the editorial explained. The Syrian regime, the edit added, is behaving as if the political crisis is a mere political problem. Such behaviour does not conform to the regime's practices: Syrian forces besieged Homs with tanks two days ago and threatened residents that it would launch a complete attack to end all forms of protest. The threat was reminiscent of the infamous Hama massacre in the 1980s. Even though civil disobedience has reached Damascus, the regime insisted on holding local elections as if there was nothing wrong. The edit noted that the Arab League will hold a meeting regarding Syria on Saturday. However, it predicted that the development could push the matter beyond Arab intervention especially if Syria made good on its threat to launch a wide-scale military operation in Homs. "The Syrian regime lost its credibility and the only solution now is a safe exit for it. Any other settlement would be like holding local elections under the present circumstances," the edit summed up. Khalaf Ali Muftah disagreed with Al-Watan. He wrote in the Syrian daily Al-Thawra that participation in local elections this week, while the country is facing an external conspiracy, has its significance. Perhaps the most important aspect, according to the edit, is that the elections came amid a comprehensive reform policy drawn up by the Syrian regime in response to popular demands. "The widespread participation in the local elections reflected the determination of the people, who belong to different political and social trends, to take part in the reform process. The reform is represented in boosting the people's participation in running the country on the basis that the main concept of democracy is to regard the citizen as a basic and active partner in the political as well as the economic and social processes," Muftah wrote. Holding the elections, which Muftah believed was a national and democratic option in the exceptional circumstances that the country was going through, proved that there is a popular will to boost the national programme for reform introduced by President Bashar Al-Assad. It also sends an important message to those who bet that the programme would fail or those who tried to impede it by tampering with local peace and internal stability. Without doubt, Muftah concluded, the success of the democratic process will push forward reform that is represented particularly in electing a new parliament and drafting a constitution. The editorial of the United Arab Emirates political daily Al-Bayan said the comment by Newt Gingrich, the Republican presidential frontrunner, that Palestinians were an "invented" people, raised many questions about the historic culture that the members of the US political elite acquire and the standards by which they take political stands. "Mr Gingrich might have forgotten that the American people were also invented, but that it did not affect any of their basic rights. Thus, why did he deny the Palestinians the right to live on the land of their fathers and forefathers and on which they lived for thousands of year?" the edit asked. Contrary to what Zionist propaganda is trying to prove, the Arabs lived in Palestine since the first millennium BC. Gone are the days, the edit underlined, when a Zionist or non-Zionist politician can say the Palestinians should be expelled from their land because they are immigrants. The Palestinian people have always been living on this land and their identity has always been that of Arab. Any claim that contradicts these facts is propaganda that nobody should respond to. The only reason that the edit responded to these claims is to show how low politicians can stoop to win more votes in elections. Elections in Egypt were also under scrutiny by writers this week. Maamoun Fendi wrote that while Egyptians are working toward moving legitimacy from public squares to parliament, the ruling military council is trying to hamper such legitimacy in words and deeds. As soon as the results of the first phase of the elections were announced, Fendi explained, the council said parliament would not be fully responsible for drafting the constitution. Then, it decided to form a consultative board. Fendi described the step as confusing and not an attempt to end a crisis. In other mixed signals, Fendi added, the council declared in statements to the press that the parliament would not have any authority regarding security issues and issues related to the armed forces. But some Egyptian newspapers said the council withdrew these statements while others predicted that there would be a confrontation between the council and the Muslim Brotherhood who are likely to take a sizeable portion of seats in parliament. The consultative board is an attempt by the military council to rearrange their house in preparation for a legitimacy that the Brotherhood or the MB and the Salafis will be granted through parliament. Fendi said the fact that the protesters were absent as members in the parliament, the government and the consultative board was an additional reason for future confrontation between the protesters and the council. As a result, the writer predicted that the revolution that started peacefully would turn violent. The situation is getting even more complicated because the ruling council still insists on trying protesters in military courts at a time when the killers of the protesters during the revolution were not tried at all. Wrote Fendi in the London-based political daily Asharq Al-Awsat: "If Anas El-Fiqi, the former minister of information, is being tried for deluding public opinion from 25 January to 11 February, why was his successor Osama Heikal not tried for the same charge? If the former minister of interior Habib El-Adli is being tried for killing protesters, why was his successor Mansour El-Eissawi not tried after 40 young martyrs fell during his term?"
