 BY FAREED MAHDY
CAIRO (IDN) - In one of his brightest public diplomacy shows so far, U.S. president Barack Obama delivered in Cairo on June 4 his long-awaited goodwill speech to the Muslims. But his great eloquence did not convince anyone, nor has it raised any hopes for concrete solutions to the huge conflicts facing Muslim peoples from Palestine to Iraq through Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Somalia and an elongated etcetera.
One day after his somehow unexpected visit to Saudi Arabia, during which he praised King Abdullah’s wisdom and asked for his advice, Obama jumped to a new trapezium, this time the 101-year old Cairo University.
There, he presented his ideas and intentions regarding what he considers as the seven major sources of tensions between the U.S. and the Muslims: violent extremism; the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arabs; democracy; religious freedom; women, and economic development.
Obama could not have started better: "I am honoured to be in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable institutions. For over 1,000 years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning, and for over a century, Cairo University has been a source of Egypt's advancement."
"Together, you represent the harmony between tradition and progress. I am grateful for your hospitality, and the hospitality of the people of Egypt. I am also proud to carry with me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: assalaamu alaykum (peace upon you, in Arabic)," the U.S. president added.
THE TENSIONS BETWEEN THE U.S. AND THE MUSLIMS
Then Obama went straight to the point: "We meet at a time of tension between the United States and Muslims around the world, tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond any current policy debate."
"The relationship between Islam and the West includes centuries of co-existence and co-operation, but also conflict and religious wars. More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations," he said.
"Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalisation led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam. Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims."
Obama spelt out the reason behind recent tensions: "The attacks of September 11th, 2001, and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights. This has bred more fear and mistrust."
And here Obama conveyed his first message: "So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the co-operation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end."
A NEW BEGINNING
Having said that, Obama sought to send out his invitation for a new beginning: "I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings."
The U.S. President then suggested the path to follow: "… I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground."
THE HOLY QURAN
Here, Obama made the first of a number of references to Quran: "As the Holy Quran tells us: 'Be conscious of God and speak always the truth.' That is what I will try to do, to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart."
Obama went on to further conquer the hearts of the Muslim audience: "Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith."
And more: "Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality."
Later on, Obama reached the climax: "… I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn't. And I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear."
Great words and admirable goodwill, indeed.
But, did president Obama and his advisers, think-tankers, analysts and experts, believe seriously that such an emotional speech would make the minds and the hearts of Muslims surrender?
Would these words eliminate the pain of two million refugees, two million displaced, the families of over a million dead people, the elderly people under fire, the orphans without schools and teachers, the destroyed hospitals with no doctors, the relatives of the girls raped by U.S. soldiers, the adult men tortured and also raped at the U.S. detention centres, jut to mention the case of Iraq?
And then, did the presidential team believe that a lot of sweet words and praises would be enough to alleviate the pain of the over 6,000 detainees at the Baghram detention centre in the very outskirts of Kabul and the traffic of boys to the U.S. troops in Afghanistan, just as ‘suspect’ terrorists? Let alone those held over seven years in Guantanamo.
What about some two million displaced in the Pakistan Swat Valley, who were expelled from their homes and lands, just because the U.S. pressures managed to bend the reluctance of Pakistan and its weak leaders, convincing them that they should destroy every living thing in that valley as part of the fight against Taliban and Al Qaeda?
Any specific political plan to concretely put an end to all this human suffering pounded on innocent civilians?
MUSLIMS MUST BEHAVE THEMSELVES!
Instead, president Obama told the Muslims to behave themselves. In fact, the conclusive section of his speech on this subject pretended to make the Muslims share the blame for the tensions.
Specifically, Obama said: "But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. . . . Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known."
OBAMA’S SEVEN BIG ISSUES
Here are the seven big issues that president Obama addressed.
1. - Violent extremism:
"The first issue that we have to confront is violent extremism in all of its forms. In Ankara (April 6 and 7), I made clear that America is not and never will be at war with Islam. We will, however, relentlessly confront violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security," the president said.
"Because we reject the same thing that people of all faiths reject: the killing of innocent men, women, and children. And it is my first duty as president to protect the American people," he added
According to Obama’s diction, terrorism, war on terrorism and all other references to terrorism, including 'the crusade’ against terrorists launched by George W. Bush, who was the U.S. president five months ago – all that has just disappeared, does not exist any more and belongs to the remote past.
So, the fight now has to be just against ‘violent extremism’, a fight as violently as if it were terrorism – but we would rather not call it terrorism?
Obama wanted to give specific examples: "The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America's goals, and our need to work together. Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al-Qaeda and the Taliban with broad international support. We did not go by choice, we went because of necessity."
He immediately referred to the events of 9/11, during which, Obama said, "al-Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people—innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody."
". . . And yet al-Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach," said the U.S. president.
Then Obama concluded: "These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with."
Now read what the U.S. president said: "We also know that military power alone is not going to solve the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is why we plan to invest $1.5 billion each year over the next five years to partner with Pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who have been displaced. . ."
". . . And that is why we are providing more than $2.8 billion to help Afghans develop their economy and deliver services that people depend upon."
Does the president of the United State of America and his advisers seriously believe that money (in this case somehow comparable to the bonus and indemnities of some top executives of big bankrupted U.S. corporations) is enough to erase seven years of imposed wars?
What about the killing of civilians during wedding parties and funerals, or the recruitment of children for the opium big business, just to mention some of the tragedies of some of the 1,5 billion Muslims he was addressing?
At this point, Obama talked about Iraq: "Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the world . . .
. . . Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible. . . "
Here Obama offered a carrot: "Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a better future – and to leave Iraq to Iraqis. I have made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory or resources. Iraq's sovereignty is its own. . .
. . . That is why I ordered the removal of our combat brigades by next August. That is why we will honour our agreement with Iraq's democratically elected government to remove combat troops from Iraqi cities by July, and to remove all our troops from Iraq by 2012. We will help Iraq train its security forces and develop its economy. But we will support a secure and united Iraq as a partner, and never as a patron.
Obama’s conclusion could not be simpler: ". . . America will defend itself respectful of the sovereignty of nations and the rule of law. And we will do so in partnership with Muslim communities, which are also threatened. The sooner the extremists are isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the sooner we will all be safer."
Is president Obama thinking of applying the Pakistani Swat Valley military solution to all Muslim countries?
2. - Israelis, Palestinians, Arabs:
The U.S. president then turned to what he called "the second major source of tension": the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world.
Obama started with a profound statement: "America's strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied . . .
. . . Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. . .
. . . Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. Denying that fact is baseless, ignorant, and hateful . . .
. . . Threatening Israel with destruction or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews is deeply wrong, and only serves to evoke in the minds of Israelis this most painful of memories while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve."
These were Obama’s words about Israel and the Jewish people.
The Palestinians were lucky enough to be also mentioned.
The following is what the president of the United States of America had to say regarding 61 years of expulsion from their homes and lands, the submission of a whole nation, the Palestinian, to iron military occupation, their imprisonment in scattered areas in their original lands, surrounded by walls, wires, check-points, siege, control of medical, food, water and power supplies, let alone the condition that Palestinians swear loyalty to Israel as a Jewish State, now claimed by the right/far-right Tel Aviv government
"On the other hand," said Obama, "it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people, Muslims and Christians, have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than 60 years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighbouring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations large and small that come with occupation. . .
. . . So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own . . .
. . . For decades, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive . . .
. . . But if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security."
Which Palestinian State? Where? What borders? How sovereign? When? These are just some of the dozens of questions that jumped to the minds and the hearts of the hundreds of millions of Muslims listening to the U.S. president. Questions, by the way, with no answer.
After stating that "That is in Israel's interest, Palestine's interest, America's interest, and the world's interest", Obama wanted to be clear: "Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed . . ."
The benevolent word "violence" used by Obama, comes here to replace the Western common word “terrorism" and the French heroic term "resistance" under the German occupation.
But the U.S. president wanted to tell the Palestinians what they should do instead: "The Palestinian Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with institutions that serve the needs of its people."
Obama did not say how the Palestinian Authority could do that.
He also told HAMAS what to do: "Hamas does have support among some Palestinians, but they also have responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, and to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, recognise past agreements, and recognise Israel's right to exist."
Did the president of the United States of America and his advisers know that HAMAS stands for ‘Islamic RESISTANCE Movement’? If they did, how come that they expect it to stop fulfilling its declared role, the one for which it was elected?
What did the U.S. presidential team pretend to mean by stating that "Hamas does have support among some Palestinians"? Did they know that HAMAS won in 2006 in clean, democratic elections, by a majority of all Palestinians, superior to the percentage that made Mr George W. Bush become "the most powerful man on earth" during 8 long years?
For the sake of an exercise in keeping balance, Obama also addressed the Israelis: "At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop."
Again, did the president and his advisors know that his predecessor George W. Bush had made the same call to Israel to stop the settlements? And so did former president Bill Clinton? And previous president Ronald Reagan? Every time with absolutely no success.
3. - Iran and the Atom:
The third source of tension, according to Obama, is "our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons".
He said: "This issue has been a source of tension between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is indeed a tumultuous history between us . . .
. . . In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against US troops and civilians."
Why the U.S. president did not make any explicit reference to the 200 nuclear weapons that Israel is reported to have?
4. – Democracy:
Obama then said "the fourth issue that I will address is democracy".
This is what he said: "I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other."
No comment!
"That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election."
So far, so good. . .
". . . But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere."
Then the president of the biggest power on earth gave the U.S recipe for democracy that everybody "must" follow: "You must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy."
5. - Religious Freedom:
According to Obama, religious freedom is the fifth issue or source of tensions: "People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith based upon the persuasion of the mind, heart, and soul. This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it is being challenged in many different ways."
Surprisingly enough, Obama appeared to be restricting religious freedom to two communities and to blame Sunnis and Shiites for the "tragic violence" in Iraq:
". . . The richness of religious diversity must be upheld whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. And faultlines must be closed among Muslims as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq."
6. - Women’s Rights:
"The sixth issue that I want to address is women's rights," Obama went on. "I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well-educated are far more likely to be prosperous . . .
. . . Now let me be clear: issues of women's equality are by no means simply an issue for Islam. In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia, we have seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the struggle for women's equality continues in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world."
Then Obama announced that "the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams."
7. - Economic Development:
The seventh and last issue that Obama wanted to discuss is economic development and opportunity.
Here, after talking about the pros and cons of Internet and television, and also of trade, modernity traditions, and identities, Obama said:
". . . I also know that human progress cannot be denied. There need not be contradiction between development and tradition. Countries like Japan and South Korea grew their economies while maintaining distinct cultures. . .
. . . The same is true for the astonishing progress within Muslim-majority countries from Kuala Lumpur to Dubai. In ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of innovation and education."
The U.S president talked about promoting education and science and technology, among other things.
In short, Obama’s speech to the Muslims appeared as more of a summon than of a specific political road map; rather than defining solution, his words raised greater scepticism and confusion.
No wonder that Israel, which is not Muslim, has welcomed the speech, significantly without making any reference to the two-State solution or to putting a halt to Israeli settlements.
Would it not be too naïve for Obama to expect that nice words are all that is needed, and for Muslims around the world not to believe in words any longer? – 07.06.2009
-----
RELATED IDN ARTICLES:
MIDDLE EAST: Netanyahu's 'Diktat' For A Non-Solution
http://www.indepthnews.net/news/news.php?key1=2009-06-17%2008:03:27&key2=1
MIDDLE EAST: Uninvited Guest Mubarak Has A Vision
http://www.indepthnews.net/news/news.php?key1=2009-06-21%2023:00:01&key2=1
MIND THE GAP: Can Gruyere Be A Solution?
http://www.indepthnews.net/news/news.php?key1=2009-03-15%2002:15:49&key2=1
|
