Historic. Brilliant. Nearly Perfect.
The tone of President Obama’s speech in Cairo was most reminiscent of his masterful speech on race in America: acknowledging open wounds on all sides, while laying out a hopeful vision for a shard future. It was a masterful narrative rejecting the Neo-conservative nightmare of the past 8 years which perpetuated the fallacy of “Clash of Civilizations.” Obama began by mapping his hope for a “new beginning between United States and Muslims around the world.” Obama then offered “the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive…they overlap…” He went on to identify the common principles between Islam and America: “justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.”
Words have power, and Obama spoke powerful words. He offered the Muslim greetings of peace (al-salam alaykum) to his audience, and acknowledged the reality of Western colonialism, as well as his hope for a shared vision of coexistence and peace.
Powerful is the vision of an American president approvingly citing from the Qur’an [chapter 5, verse 32] that to save one human life is akin to saving the life of all humanity, and taking one human life is akin to taking the life of all humanity.
Obama hit many of the right notes: he conveyed to his audience that he is familiar with the vast and glorious history of Islam, such as the long periods of religious tolerance in Andalucia where Muslims, Jews, and Christian lived together in peace under Islamic rule. He praised Muslims’ contribution to science, philosophy, and learning. His mentioning of “timeless poetry and cherished music” was a nod towards the rich aesthetic tradition of Islamic cultures.
The nuanced position Obama took on Palestine/Israel was the most closely watched component of his speech. The tone was expected, affirming America’s allegedly “unbreakable” bond with Israel, while also acknowledging that Palestinians suffer in an “intolerable” condition. Yet the specifics offered were bolder: two states living side by side, a rejection of illegal Jewish settlements on the West Bank, and Jerusalem as a city shared by Muslims, Jews, and Christians. Many Muslims were offended that there was no mention of the recent Israeli atrocities in Gaza. Furthermore, it is maddeningly frustrating for Muslims to be repeatedly told that they have to recognize Israel’s right to exist when it is not specified the borders of the state they are being asked to recognize: would it be the 1967 borders? 1973? 2009? In addition, it overlooks the multiple times that Arab and Muslim states, including Palestinian authorities, have in fact recognized Israel.
As incomplete, and indeed flawed, as that portion of the speech was (delivered under intense pre-emptive pressure from the Israel Lobby), there was a magical, Obama-at-his-best, appeal to the Night Journey (Isra) of the Prophet Muhammad, where he prayed together with all the prophets, including Moses and Jesus, in Jerusalem. This is Obama at a level of rhetorical brilliance and inclusiveness that is simply unmatched in American politics.
There were other missed opportunities: There were no critiques of Egypt’s own violations of human rights, something that Muslim human rights activists were eager to hear .
As a committed Christian, Obama knows all too well the Biblical challenge of “You shall know them by their fruits.” Obama’s words were historic, brilliant, almost perfect. Now comes the hard part of following up on the beautiful intentions and the inclusive words: righteous and courageous action that bring all those of good will together. He–and we–shall be judged, on earth and in Heaven, by those actions.
posted June 6, 2009 at 10:57 am
Basically, Obama sugar coated the bad regimes of the Islamic world — from the tyranny that characterizes its regimes, to the misogyny, xenophobia, Jew hatred, and general intolerance that characterizes its societies.
In so doing he made clear that his idea of pressing the restart button with the Islamic world involves erasing the moral distinctions between the Islamic world and the free world.
In contrast, Obama’s weird characterization of Israel — of the sources of its legitimacy and of its behavior — made clear that he shares the Arab’s view that there is something basically illegitimate about the Jewish state.
In 1922 the League of Nations mandated Great Britain to facilitate the reconstitution of the Jewish commonwealth in the Land of Israel on both sides of the Jordan River. The international community’s decision to work towards the reestablishment of Jewish sovereignty in Israel owed to its recognition of the Jewish people’s legal, historic, and moral rights to its own homeland.
Arab propaganda finds this basic and fundamental truth inconvenient. So for the past 60 years, the Arabs have been advancing the fiction that Israel’s existence owes solely to European guilt over the Holocaust. As far as the Arabs are concerned, the Jews have no legal, historic, or moral right to what the Arabs see as Islamic land.
In his address, while Obama admonished the Arabs for their pervasive Jew hatred and Holocaust denial, he effectively accepted and legitimized their view that Israel owes its existence to the Holocaust when he said, “the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied,” and then went on to talk about the Holocaust.
Historic? Yes. However, he essentially disrespected his own country on foreign soil. He is too much of a coward to say things like this in his own country. Brilliant, no.
posted June 6, 2009 at 9:07 pm
George Washington on Israel
“A passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification.” ~George Washington Farewell Address
“The nation which indulges toward another habitual hatred or habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interests.” ~ George Washington
“Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none.” ~ Thomas Jefferson
posted June 7, 2009 at 5:10 pm
I have a hard time understanding the problem with the religious differences. There IS but ONE GOD. I challenge anyone who doesn’t6 believe that to find another who can do what THE ONE GOD has done. The same instructions by HIM are in EVERY “Bible”, Quoran, or whatever you call your guiding manual. They ALL attest to the fact that we are to “Love, care for, protect)our neighbor as for ourselves. GOD wants us to care for others the same way we do for ouirselves IF HE wanted us to kill each other, starve each other, or denude everyone who didn’t call GOD by the name HE has been given, HE would have instructed us to do that. Anyone who reads that into what HE has instructed, doesn’t know how to read, listen, or understand. If we could walk in another man’s shoes even for a day, We would be glad to keep wearing our own.