While applauding his efforts both at the inauguration and in his Al Arabiyah interview, President Obama's words often missed the mark. With the best of intentions and in pursuit of an important goal, I think that he was too hard on many and too soft on some in the Muslim world.
Is there really a clash of civilizations, as President Obama's words indicate? If there is not, then there would be no need to reach out to the entire Muslim world as he did in his inaugural address. If there is no civilizational clash, then he should have addressed no specific religious group, but those people who either support, or are opposed to, America and the values which animate our nation.
And if there is a genuine clash between two civilizations, what is the source of the clash? Is it intrinsic to Islam? And if it is not, and it is not, then why approach it that way? Could it be that the president was playing to those who see America's policies as a war against Muslims? And if he was, is that approach likely to bear fruit? I think not.
We ought not to favor any conceptual model which pits two distinct civilizations against each other. Not because it isn't nice, but because it artificially simplifies the challenges we face, and incorrectly presumes a monolithic Muslim world which is against "us". But who is "us"? Does it mean Americans? If so, where do six million American Muslims fit into this equation? And that's just for starters.
There is no single Muslim world, and any intimation that there is, will either work against addressing the serious threats we face from some Muslims, or cause us to miss the genuine opportunities that will be found by working more constructively with many more.
Where President Obama got it right was in using the word "mutual" to define the new way forward which he seeks.
Right or wrong in terms of specific policies, unilateralism is doomed as a guiding principle in a globalized world. Without backing down from those principles we hold most dearly, principles including openness, inclusivity, and religious tolerance, we must not simply rest in the rightness of that which we believe.
We must reach out and meet people, even those with whom we may disagree, where they are. We must not wait for them to be where we want them to be. On the other hand, we must not shy away from taking on nations who threaten the world's ability to sustain those values we hold most dearly either.
We have to be willing to confront the real challenges posed by the hundreds of millions of Muslims around the world who according to recent research, report genuine hostility to America and our approach to personal freedom. Ultimately, it is our willingness to be extremely tough on those who pose a genuine threat to us and to our way of life that creates the foundation upon which to build better relationships with those who differ from us but are not hostile to us.
Frankly, I would have preferred no overt outreach to any specific community. I would have preferred the President reach out to all communities, regardless of race, religion or ethnicity, who are ready to work with our country on the basis of shared values and commitments.
We will not always agree, but anyone who comes to the table with honesty and a willingness to work in light of those values, even if we disagree about certain specific policies, should be welcomed.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Author, radio and TV talk show host, and President of CLAL-The National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership, Brad Hirschfield is the author of 
I suppose the poster above lacked an original thought and had to cut and paste another's at length, when a link would do. As for
"Ultimately, it is our willingness to be extremely tough on those who pose a genuine threat to us and to our way of life that creates the foundation upon which to build better relationships with those who differ from us but are not hostile to us."
There's extremely tough, and there's wild eyed crazy. Recent events cause many of us to wonder how close Israel is to becoming like its adversaries.
The antisemitism in the Muslim world is mostly of Christian European origin, but that doesn't seem to prevent antisemitism from permeating the Arab and Muslim world.
Obama should be telling Muslim leaders that Jews don't control the media and there are no international Zionist conspiracies.
I disagree with the statement that the "clash between civilizatios" is not intrinsic to Islam... I believe that from the start of Islam there has been an ongoing "drive" to bring everyone under the "rule" of Islam. Look at the theocratic societies under Islamic rule. Look at Saudi Arabia where th ONLY religion that can be openly practiced is Islam. Look at the schools that Saudi Arabia suppots around the wrold teaching a "no holds barred" version of Islamic supremacy. Look at Iran where all legislation is subject to religious veto AND the organs of government are used to "put down" dissent. Look at the Taliban when they were in control. If you are not convinced by the current situation -- look at the history. Maimonides had to flee [ultimately to Egypt] because of the Islamic ocnquests. At best, one could hope for an enlightened Islamic figure who would CHOOSE not to "crack down" on he Jews.
If you need still more convincing, look at the institution of the "Dhimmi" -- in the Islamic world whe Jews and Christians are "tolerated" but clearly not "equal".
Look at the treatment of the gentle B'hai hwo originatd in Iran and are treated as Heretics.
Finally, look at the fact that NOT ONE Major Islmic figure hs CONDEMNED the attacks of terror on Jews. (And, please do not cite for me some Islamic figure in Italy or the U.S. We all know that the Major center(s) of Islam are in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and other Arab countries.)
Has ANY Major Islamic figure ever condemned the Grand Mufti for his alliance with Hitler [May his name be blotted out]? On the contrary, we find Iran led by a denier of the Sho'ah -- and NO MAJOR SHI'ITE FIGURE TELLS HIM THAT HE IS WRONG! When the Pope "reinstatd" a man ho denied the Sho'ah, the Pope -- at least -- made clear that such denial is wron. When was this done by a Major Leader in the Islamic world?
So, instead of fooling yourself with sweet fantasies, it is time to wake up. There is a clear reason why the Torah describes the Children of Ishma'el as "his hand against all" and as a "Perreh Adam" (best translated as a "wild man" who respects no one else).
When we can face the hard truth -- perhaps the -- and only then -- some ral progress will be made.
President Obama has confused culture with ideology. It is the various interpretations of Islam that are creating the divisions in the Arab world, fed by the extremists on anti-semitism and anti-western rantings and propaganda. They don't want their contemporaries to realize that Judaism has reconciled the levels of belief and their ever changing dynamics. We are a single culture with many different faces. That must really scare hell out of extremist Muslim leaders and in that respect, I agree with you, Rabbi.
"Zvi I Weiss
February 2, 2009 12:39 PM
I disagree with the statement that the "clash between civilizatios" is not intrinsic to Islam... I believe that from the start of Islam there has been an ongoing "drive" to bring everyone under the "rule" of Islam"
Sounds very familiar...........the Israelite romp through Canaan...G-d told them too of course......the Crusades of Christianity, in Jesus name of course. And how about our current venture into Iraq? To establish democrasy of course......in the name of thee Constitution and all free thinking people........of course.
Homo Mysticus
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.