SMC: Arab Media Conference an Opportunity to Correct Stereotypes About Iraq
Head of the Security Media Cell, Major General Saad Maan, stated today, Wednesday, that the Arab Media Conference in Baghdad represents a significant opportunity to correct prevailing stereotypes about Iraq. He noted that the participation of more than 200 Arab media professionals in the conference sends a clear message of confidence in the country's current stability.
Speaking to the Iraqi News Agency (INA), Maan said: 'The fourth edition of the Arab Media Conference, held in Baghdad under the patronage of the Iraqi Media Network, is an important platform for conveying an accurate picture of the reality in Iraq—free from flattery or media distortion.'
He added, 'We are in urgent need of presenting a realistic image of Iraq. We do not seek promotion or compliments, but rather a precise and honest portrayal of the situation. Iraq, and Baghdad in particular, has long suffered from media injustice and either intentional or inaccurate misrepresentation.'
Maan emphasized that 'the presence of over 200 Arab journalists and representatives from Arab media institutions marks a genuine breakthrough in the effort to correct the false stereotypes about Iraq,' affirming that 'the security situation in Baghdad is largely stable, comparable to that of many regional and international capitals.'
He further explained that 'presenting reality as it is benefits not only Arab media, but also the region and the world, because Iraq is deeply rooted in history, active in shaping the future, and a key player in the equation of stability and development.' He stressed the importance of 'unifying Arab media discourse on shared issues, avoiding fragmentation and narrow agendas.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Memri
a day ago
- Memri
Editor Of Qatari Government Daily: Hamas Must Not Disarm – It Will Defeat Israel With The Strength Of Its Weapons Like The Taliban Defeated Both The U.S. And The West
According to numerous recent reports in Arab media, a demand to disarm has been presented to Hamas, as part of the contacts for a ceasefire in Gaza, and this demand was rejected by Hamas officials.[1] Joining Hamas in its position are journalists in Qatar, who call the weapons of the Palestinian resistance an "existential necessity" that "are not to be bargained over"; they also refer to them as "honor" and that "relinquishing them is humiliation" and as a means that "caused heavy losses to the occupation." Particularly noticeable among these journalists was the position of Jabar Al-Harmi, editor of the Al-Sharq government daily, who called on Hamas not to give up its weapons and not to disavow its October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, because "what was taken by force will be restored only by force." He called on Hamas to act like the Taliban in Afghanistan, which despite its sacrifices never gave up its weapons and, "armed from head to toe," forced the U.S. to sit at the negotiating table with it to discuss "not what it [the U.S.] would achieve and what it would gain, but how it would escape [from Afghanistan]." Hamas's holding on to its weapons, he said, would stop Israel from recovering from October 7; he added that in any case, Israel's disappearance was nearer than people think. It should be noted that Al-Harmi also holds antisemitic views and has called for the destruction of Israel. In his articles in the newspaper, and on his X account, he regularly expresses support for Hamas and its October 7, 2023 attack, in which 1,200 were killed and 251 were taken to Gaza as hostages.[2] This mirrors Qatar's absolute support for Hamas.[3] Cartoon in Qatari daily Al-Quds Al-Arabi: Resistance fighter stands fast against attempts to take "the weapons of the resistance" from him. (Source: Al-Quds Al-Arabi, London, April 25, 2025) This report will present the positions of writers in Qatar on the subject of the "weapons of the resistance," particularly the position of Al-Sharq editor Jabar Al-Harmi: Al-Sharq Editor Al-Harmi On X, May 24, 2025: Like The Taliban, Hamas Must Not Give Up Its Weapons – And Must Not Disavow Its October 7 Attack Al-Sharq editor Jabar Al-Harmi called on Hamas not to give up its weapons and not to disavow its October 7, 2023 attack. He likened Hamas's situation to that of the Afghan Taliban, who never relinquished their weapons and even, he said, forced the U.S. to negotiate with them by force of their weapons, in addition to "defeating Russia and then the U.S. and the West all together" who today seek "the love of the Afghans – love that comes by force of arms." In a May 24, 2025 post on X, Al-Harmi wrote: "Had the Afghans agreed to solutions of submission during the invasion of their country by two of the strongest countries – the U.S.S.R. in 1979 and the U.S. in 2002 [sic[4]] – and had they said 'We have no strength against these two countries, we are a poor country, and if we are in a position of inferiority, we have no weapons and the world is set against us,' they would not today have a state that is respected by all those who invaded them previously. "The Afghans opposed [the invaders] with their force and might, defeating Russia and then the U.S. and the West all together. Although the invaders used the most criminal weapons, including weapons banned by international conventions, the Afghans did not surrender, despite all the victims. This is what ultimately forced the invaders to sit at the negotiating table with them, by force of arms – not to negotiate over what it [the U.S.] would achieve and what it would gain, but how it would escape [from Afghanistan]. "This did not happen by virtue of the Afghans' consent to disarm – it was by virtue of their strong opposition to the invaders and their defense by means of everything they had, and by means of the weapons of the enemies that they had seized. This is the path to liberation. What was taken by force will be restored only by force, and anything else is an attempt to anesthetize and distract the occupied peoples. Today, Russia and the U.S. seek the love of the Afghans – a love that comes by force of arms. "Consent to disarm the resistance in Gaza and to disavow the October 7 [attack] means that the enemy [Israel] will revive, [and will continue to exist] for the next 100 years. Even if the Palestinian people is wounded, and if the Gazans are dead, do not think that the enemy is relaxed – on the contrary, its fear is greater, and it is now focusing on its entity's future. Will this entity, which is [weaker than] a spiderweb,[5] survive, or will it disappear and not see out its eighth decade? Its disappearance is nearer than you think. 'If you should be suffering – so are they suffering as you are suffering' – but the difference [between the two comes at the end of the verse]: 'You have hope of reward, help, and support from Allah, which they cannot hope for.'[6]"[7] Post by Jaber Al-Harmi ( May 24, 2025) Al-Harmi On X, April 14, 2025: The "Weapons Of The Resistance" In Gaza Are Not For Sale And Are Nonnegotiable In a previous X post, on April 14, 2025, Al-Harmi rejected the demand that Hamas disarm, using the same parallel to the Taliban's refusal to negotiate over disarming. He wrote: "The resistance in Gaza, whether Hamas or another [resistance movement], will not fall into the trap of disarmament, no matter what guarantees [it receives]... "[In the case of the] Taliban in Afghanistan, the U.S. tried to set this [disarmament] as the main condition for negotiations, [but the] Taliban would not negotiate at all about this, and the U.S. was forced to go back to the negotiating table with the Taliban while the latter was armed from head to toe. They told the U.S.: 'It was only the weapons that brought you to sit at the negotiating table with us. Therefore, the resistance must not negotiate over its weapons in any way.' The weapons of the resistance in Gaza are not for sale and are nonnegotiable."[8] Article In Al-Sharq, April 23, 2025: The Weapons Of The Resistance Are An Existential Necessity And An Influential Means Of Action Opposition to disarming Hamas was also seen in many articles in the Qatari government press. For example, Palestinian writer Hadir Rashad explained in his column in Al-Sharq, under the headline "The Weapons Of The Resistance Are Not For Bargaining," that "it is not easy to raise the issue of disarming the resistance without this proposal crashing into the obvious wall of reality, according to which weapons in the hands of peoples under occupation are not a choice but an existential necessity... The weapons of the resistance in Gaza will never be a mere symbol or slogan – they are an influential means of action that caused the occupation heavy losses in lives and in [its] economy... "The call to disarm the resistance in Palestine before the occupation departs is a call for surrender, not peace; for permanent consent to the aggression and not for stopping it; for apparent calm whose hidden meaning is seizing the trump card from the hands of the people that has only force of will and arms."[9] Article In Al-Watan, May 16, 2025: Weapons Are Honor, Relinquishing Them Is Humiliation In his May 16, 2025 column in the Qatari government daily Al-Watan, Palestinian writer Samir Al-Barghouti presented the results of a Palestinian poll that showed widespread Palestinian support for Hamas amid the decline in the prestige of the Palestinian Authority and of Fatah. He stated that "82% of the Palestinian [respondents] said that they oppose handing over the weapons of the resistance." He summarized the survey, stating: "Since the first and second intifadas, and the [Al-Aqsa] Flood [the October 7 attack], Palestinians have believed that they have no other choice but resistance, and that weapons are honor, and relinquishing them is humiliation."[10]
Memri
2 days ago
- Memri
Article On Emirati News Site: The D.C. Terror Attack In In Which Two Israel Embassy Staffers Were Murdered Is A Mini-Version Of 9/11 And A Direct Result Of The West Ignoring The Danger Of The Muslim B
In a May 23, 2025 article on the Emirati news site Al Ain, Yemeni columnist Hani Salem Mashour responded to the May 21, 2025 murderous attack in Washington D.C. in which two staff members of the Israeli embassy in Washington were shot dead. Hani wrote that the shooting was a "mini-version" of the September 11, 2001 attacks in the U.S. and a direct continuation of them, since both attacks sprang from the same ideological root and were perpetrated under the same political pretext. Moreover, both were a direct result of the Western policy that allows political Islam organizations, in particular the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), to operate in the West in the name of liberties and the freedom of expression while ignoring its discourse of incitement and hatred. Mashour added that, despite the time that has elapsed since the September 11 attacks, no meaningful action has been taken to constrain the incitement of political Islam: the Arab world has not purged its religious discourse of extremism, and the West continues to permit the activity of these extremist organizations within its borders, along with their inciting discourse. Furthermore. the West disregarded the warning of Emirati Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Aal Nahyan in 2017 that "the MB is more dangerous than Al-Qaeda and ISIS," and that tolerating political Islam in Western countries would turn them into incubators of terrorist and hate-filled discourse.[1] In these circumstances, he said, the terrorist attack in Washington comes as no surprise. Mashour urged the Arab countries and the West to join forces in a comprehensive campaign against political Islam, and warned that hesitation in this matter would only lead to more attacks. Sarah Milgrim and Yaron Lischinsky, the two Israel Embassy staffers murdered in Washington D.C. (Source: May 22, 2025) The following are translated excerpts from Mashour's article:[2] "What happened in Washington [i.e. the murder of the two Israeli Embassy staffers] did not take place in a vacuum. It was a distant echo of a larger explosion that occurred more than two decades ago in New York. The equation has not changed since September 11, only the façade has changed: from planes to guns, and from Al-Qaeda to lone wolves nourished by the discourse of political Islam dressed up in slogans about discrimination. Between the former terrorist attack [i.e., 9/11] and the recent bullet, the Arab world missed the opportunity to renew its religious discourse, and the West hesitated in its struggle against organizations that despise its democracy yet are nourished by its laws. "What took place in Washington is just a replica, albeit in miniature, of the September 11, 2001 [attacks] – the same ideological root, the same political justification wrapped in slogans, and the same fatal Western disregard of those who lead the hate-filled discourse, [disregard] under the banner of 'rights and freedoms.' Between these two dates there was sufficient time to learn lessons, but the Arabs did not renew their religious discourse and the West did not dry up the wellsprings of terrorism. "On the contrary, at their conferences, Arab [Islamists] began to refer to Western cities – from London to Amsterdam and from Paris to Washington – as 'London-stan,' 'Amsterdam-stan,' 'Paris-stan' and 'Washington-stan.' [These] cities started to produce a discourse of hatred in the name of Islam, [discourse that emerged] not from the caves of Kandahar and Tora Bora in Afghanistan but from the heart of licensed mosques, non-governmental organizations and university classes. "The murderer in Washington [D.C.] needed no orders from any leadership [to perpetrate the attack]. It's enough that he was raised in an ideological atmosphere that enabled [the name] Palestine to be mixed up with terrorism and [the demand for] liberty to be mixed up with slaughter. The words he uttered before firing [his weapon, i.e., "Free Palestine!"] were no slip of the tongue, but the essence of the incitement that has been ongoing for decades in the name of the just [Palestinian] cause, which was long ago highjacked by political Islam. "In this context precisely came the courageous early warning of Emirati Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Aal Nahyan, who said what many hadn't dared to say, [namely that] the Muslim Brotherhood is more dangerous than Al-Qaeda and ISIS. This was no exaggeration but a prescient truth, [precisely] because the [MB] organization does not knock on doors with explosives but rather with legal documents and media platforms. It infiltrates [societies] as a [charitable] association and spreads as an ideology, and when the times comes it produces from its ranks the one who squeezes the trigger. "Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al-Nahyan did not just warn about the [MB] ideology, but explicitly noted that hosting political Islam organizations in the West under the slogan of freedom of expression and democracy would turn these [Western] countries into incubators of terrorist, hate-filled discourse. This is exactly what we are seeing today, when shots are fired in the heart of the American capital in the name of a highjacked cause and a polluted ideology. "The West did not take this warning seriously. It counted on the 'moderation' of the [MB's] discourse, while [the latter] built its networks within [the West's] institutions. The biggest mistake was and remains the false distinction between the 'moderate MB' and the 'extremist Islamists' – [for] they are all products of the same text, even if [their] executive mechanisms are different. "The event in Washington was not surprising. On the contrary, it was only a matter of time. The failure to pass deterrent laws that prohibit the activity of the MB and of the [other] streams of political Islam is the biggest problem, not only in the U.S. but in all the countries that have yet to acknowledge that the battle is not only against armed terrorism but [also] against the soft terrorism that starts with incitement and ends in bloodshed. "France began to comprehend this too late, but today it understands and sees the MB as a key threat to its security. It monitors its financing, limits its activity in its low-income neighborhoods and realizes that permitting its presence in the name of democracy means the systematic dismantling of the Republic itself. As for Washington, it is still in a state of shock: it suffices with condemnations following every [violent] event and then goes back to nurturing these groups that preach violence under the cover of freedom [of expression]. "During his first term in office, president [Donald] Trump came close to designating the MB as a terrorist organization, but the decision was held up by the red tape of the deep state and the opposition of pressure groups and media circles. Today, with his return to the White House, the opportunity is back. "This is where the true role of the moderate Arab countries comes in, and we must not miss this opportunity again. The coordination with the Trump administration must go far beyond a security alliance or the exchange of information. We are at a political juncture that allows [us] to incriminate the MB on a global scale, dry up its ideological wellsprings and expose its continent-spanning financing network. "[Today], after the shooting in Washington, the situation must change. There is no longer any justification for legal tolerance or political leniency toward the lighthouses of inciting ideology. There is choice but to wage an ideological, legal, security and media struggle against all those who claim a monopoly on Islam in order to establish their caliphate over the [spilled] blood of Jews, Christians and the Muslims themselves. "This article is not a cry of fury but a repeated warning for those who have not yet woken up. Whoever fails to see that the threat of political Islam has become tangible, deadly and present in the streets of the Western capitals must be blind or in collusion [with the MB]. The shooting at the Jewish Museum will not be the last. It is just a reminder that the fire is still burning and that we are living with a ticking bomb that does not explode only when its sound is heard but when we are silent for too long and fail to prevent it [from exploding]."
Iraqi News
3 days ago
- Iraqi News
North Korea's Kim vows 'unconditional support' for Russia's war in Ukraine
INA- SOURCES North Korea has become one of Moscow's main allies during its more than three-year Ukraine offensive, sending thousands of troops and container-loads of weapons to help the Kremlin oust Ukrainian forces from Russia's Kursk border region. Meeting top Russian security official Sergei Shoigu on Wednesday, Kim said that Pyongyang would "unconditionally support the stand of Russia and its foreign policies in all the crucial international political issues including the Ukrainian issue", the Korean Central News Agency reported. Kim "expressed expectation and conviction that Russia would, as ever, surely win victory in the sacred cause of justice", KCNA said. The two sides agreed to "continue to dynamically expand" relations, the state news agency reported. Russia and North Korea signed a sweeping military deal last year, including a mutual defence clause, during a rare visit by Russian leader Vladimir Putin to the nuclear-armed North. Shoigu hailed the deal as "fully meeting the interests of both countries" during a visit in March. Around 600 North Korean soldiers have been killed and thousands more wounded fighting for Russia, according to South Korean lawmaker Lee Seong-kweun, citing the country's intelligence service. North Korea in April confirmed for the first time that it had deployed troops to Russia to support Moscow's war in Ukraine -- and admitted that its troops had been killed in combat. South Korea has also accused the nuclear-armed North of sending significant volumes of weapons, including missiles, to help Russia's war effort. The visit was Shoigu's second to Pyongyang in less than three months. Deepening ties A multilateral sanctions monitoring group including South Korea, the United States, Japan and eight other countries last week condemned ties between Russia and North Korea as "unlawful". According to the group, Russian-flagged cargo vessels delivered as many as "nine million rounds of mixed artillery and multiple rocket launcher ammunition" from North Korea to Russia last year. In return, "Russia is believed to have provided North Korea with air defence equipment and anti-aircraft missiles", it said. The meeting between Kim and Shoigu in Pyongyang came the same day the North's arch-enemy South Korea swore in new president Lee Jae-myung. In a speech upon taking office Wednesday, Lee vowed to reach out to the North -- a marked departure from his hawkish predecessor Yoon Suk Yeol, under whom relations plummeted to their worst level in years. Lee said Seoul would "deter North Korean nuclear and military provocations while opening communication channels and pursuing dialogue and cooperation to build peace on the Korean Peninsula". KCNA reported on Lee's inauguration in a two-line report on Thursday but did not respond to his overtures for talks. It also issued a commentary Thursday slamming French President Emmanuel Macron over "imprudent" comments on Pyongyang's ties with Moscow, calling them "shocking claptrap". The commentary by analyst Choe Ju Hyun took aim at comments by the French leader during the recent Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. Macron suggested that the NATO defence alliance could become involved in Asia if China did not do more to press North Korea to stop sending forces to help Russia's war in Ukraine. "It is a mistake if Macron thinks that he can cloak NATO's aggressive and wicked intention to put dirty military shoes on the Asia-Pacific region by taking issue with the DPRK-Russia cooperative relations," the commentary said, referring to North Korea by its official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
