by Dr Qaisar Rashid
How to make the Muslims forget the follies of the regime led by the former US President, George W Bush, seems the main foreign policy agenda of the incumbent President, Barack Hussain Obama.
Once reputation is tarnished, its salvage is difficult is the dilemma the Obama regime including Hillary Clinton is confronted with for the US. On June 5, 2009, at Cairo University, Egypt, Obama took finally a daring decision to reach out to the Muslims in general in an attempt to make them forget the words like ‘crusade’ used for the war on terror and overlook the places like Guantanamo Bay. Instead, the Muslims were urged to share a common ground of trust, harmony, and respect.
Obama’s speech depicted clearly a change in the thinking of the Americans in general. Obama’s words personified that change to end hostility with the Muslims. Nevertheless, Obama was not totally defensive. He forwarded his case successfully regarding violent extremism, the Palestinian-Israel issue, nuclear capability, democracy, religious freedom, women rights and economic development affecting the Muslims in general.
The contents of the speech were recognition of the fact that the US did recognize existence of the fault lines, whether those were on the ideological plane or the cultural front, between the countries populated by the Muslims and those inhabited by the Christians. Unlike Bush, who took upon himself the task of introducing democracy to the world, Obama unequivocally said that the US would not force democracy on any country; the matter of having democracy or not would be of one’s choice. This message was basically directed to the regimes of the Middle East having the wealth of oil and fear of democracy. Secondly, this message of Obama might have pleased Hosni Mubarak who had been ruling Egypt authoritatively for the past several years.
In Obama’ speech, the phrase the ‘Muslim world’ was not used. So the addressee was the Muslim audience. Through his speech, Obama tried to elevate the ego of the Muslims to make them feel respected in the eyes of the Christians when Obama referred to the past and praised the contributions made by the Muslims to the fields of science and arts. In the speech, there was also an undertone of request to the Muslims to re-start contributions scientifically, as they used to do in the past, and not to be dragged along, as the current situation is: the Muslims should be constructive contributors to the development of the world rather than liability on the world. Nevertheless, as a Christian, Obama extended a hand of friendship towards the Muslims and, through his speech, made the 1.5 billion Muslims of the world realize that they were not irrelevant to be written off.
Obama acknowledged that in the presence of mistrust amassed over the years, “no single speech” could eradicate mistrust. Nonetheless, in the context of the US, the first problem was with the words. Wrong words were uttered by the Bush regime. Even if the wrong deeds do not follow them, only the words do the damage. This time, at least, noble words have been used by Obama. Further, at least, no harm has been inflicted on the feelings and aspirations of the Muslims in general. Whether the words of Obama are translated into concrete policies or not will be decided by time, nevertheless, the speaker, Obama will remain accountable for what he said and pledged publicly.
One of the major issues Obama focused on was the Palestine issue, the main source of mistrust between the Muslims and the US. For the Palestinians and Israel, Obama’s speech was a policy speech. Obama made the contours of his foreign policy public. Unlike Bush, Obama did not accept the changing “ground realities” on the West Bank happening under the pretence of the ‘natural growth’ for the expansion of the Jews settlements. On the one hand, Obama neutralized the existential threat to Israel posed by Iran (when Ahmedinejad, the President of Iran, questioned presence of Israel in the Middle East); on the other hand, Obama acknowledged the historical (and religious) right of the Jews to have a homeland in the Middle East – but asked them to respect the right of the Palestinians to have their own independent state with defined geographical boundaries promised to them earlier under the UNSC resolutions.
Obama was in need of partners in the Middle East that could guarantee existence of Israel and lessen the fear for and against Israel. Seeking partners in the rulers is one thing, but Obama was looking for amiable Arab populace towards Israel. Over the years of experience, the US has realized that unless the common Arabs support the US policies in the region, no favourable change for Israel can take place. The status quo is creating more complications than solutions.
Obama had aptly realized that the “new beginning” between the US and the Muslims was not possible without settlement of the core issue of Palestine. Further, Obama knew that no opening was available in the Middle East if the issue of Palestine would not be addressed. By speaking for the right of the Palestinians to live honourably in their homeland, Obama carved out a window of opportunity to forge friendly ties with the Arabs of the Middle East.
About Iran, two points are clear from Obama’s speech: Iran will not be allowed to rise as a regional player lest it might challenge Israel directly and that Iran will be denied nuclear technology lest it might make a bomb to balance Israel. So, the major challenge to the speech of Obama is supposed to come from Iran. How Iran protects its interests and how Iran ensures its honourable survival in the region are yet to be seen.
Barack Husain Obama has indicated a change in emphasis; no stress on democracy now.
This was a positive point of George W Bush. It pressurised Saudi Arabia to behave, give women’s rights which is so much stressed in Islam that the girl when born is called a Rehmat – a blessing and the boy only a Nemat – a good thing.
With stress on democracy Saudi Arabia would have shown some tolerance to other sects in Islam other than their Wahabism and at least would have allowed Quran translation in their country other than their approved version, now Obama has taken pressure off them and has indirectly helped Talibanization.
Saudi Arabia backs Taliban and Obama ultimately if he turns a Muslim will be a Taliban or Taliban inclined and then openly will turn enemy of Iran and to a lesser extent of Pakistan and he cannot be trusted.
He is a powerful speaker though.
We must remember George W Bush is the initiator of the anti Taliban and the anti Alqaeda policy and not Obama and this anti Taliban trend has caught up late in Pakistan after they had already done a lot of damage to the country.
Leave your response!
You must be logged in to post a comment.