Muslims Wait for Obama to Deliver
On Wednesday, he will be in Saudi Arabia to meet King Abdullah. On Thursday, he will be in Egypt to deliver his much-anticipated address to Muslims.
He has already taken four mini-jabs at the subject - in his inaugural address; his Jan. 27 interview with Al-Arabiya TV; his March 19 video address to Iran; and his April 6 speech to the Turkish parliament.
This has drawn mixed reviews:
He wouldn't be addressing the Christian world, or the Jewish, Hindu or Buddhist worlds. Why the exception for Muslims?
By framing terrorism in religious terms, he's treading the same turf as militant Islamists, on the one hand, and Bush, on the other.
He has no choice but to fix the shattered relationship between the U.S. and the Muslim world.
What are his challenges? Four experts I spoke to outlined them:
Where's the beef? Juan Cole, author of Engaging the Muslim World (Palgrave Macmillan), said Obama has done well to ditch Bush's formulation that tackling Muslim militants was "like taking on the Axis powers in World War II, and the way to do it was through conquest, occupation and a transformation of the Muslim world.
"That was a huge conceptual error, doomed to failure."
Jihadists are not the old Soviet Union nor Nazi Germany. Non-state actors are best dealt with as the criminals they are.
However, Obama has a challenge of his own. "Beyond denying the Bush paradigm, he must develop his own positive paradigm. I haven't heard that articulated," said Cole, professor of history at the University of Michigan.
John Esposito, co-author of Who Speaks for Islam? What a Billion Muslims Really Think (Gallup Press), also feels Obama is running out of time. "The window is beginning to close on him."
Egypt: "There's a real irony in the leader of the free world delivering a major speech to Muslims in one of the most repressive parts of the world," said Nader Hashemi, author of Islam, Secularism and Liberal Democracy (Oxford).
Hosni Mubarak is an oppressive dictator, "one of the most despised, in part due to his close alliance with the U.S. and collusion with Israel in maintaining the siege on Gaza."
A better platform would have been Indonesia, the largest Muslim nation, or Pakistan, Turkey or Bangladesh, all evolving democracies.
Israel-Palestine: It's the No. 1 issue for Muslims, said Esposito, director of the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University in Washington.
Hashemi, a native of Toronto now teaching Middle East and Islamic politics at the University of Denver, recalled Obama's words in Sderot last year that if his daughters were subject to daily rocket fire, as Israelis were from Hamas, he'd do everything in his power to stop it.
"This begged the question: if the president's daughters were refugees who could not return home, stuck in one of the most densely populated areas of the globe, and subject to an ongoing siege, would Obama also do everything in his power to alleviate their suffering?
"Failure to speak in moral terms about the plight of the Palestinians will be a massive setback for his Muslim outreach initiative."
Iraq: If Obama's pullout plans work out, he'll have neutralized the second biggest source of anger.
Embracing dictators: Polls show that Muslims are as desirous of democracy as any other people. And they resent the Western hypocrisy of promoting democracy and human rights but cavorting with Arab dictators and monarchs.
"Without naming Egypt, I think Obama will say that the U.S. will no longer be supportive of autocrats, who deprive their people the right to freedom," said Shuja Nawaz of the Atlantic Council, a Washington think-tank on international affairs.
But that's what Condoleezza Rice said in Cairo in 2005, and nothing came of it. Nawaz: "Frankly, that's his biggest challenge - how to deal with the Islamic autocrats."
Iran: Cole said Obama is sending mixed signals. "He wants face-to-face talks with Iran but has named Dennis Ross as the point person. He's a well-known hawk on Iran. The Iranians are upset and have made it clear they're not going to sit down across the table from Ross.
"Also, Obama is using the Bush rhetoric about not allowing Iran to have a nuclear weapon. But American intelligence agencies do not see an Iranian nuclear program."
Esposito noted that Obama is not threatening to go to war with North Korea, despite its nuclear blasts. It is, thus, important to "indicate that he is not going to be stampeded into a military action against Iran."
Afghanistan/Pakistan: Nawaz, author of Crossed Swords: Pakistan, its Army, and the Wars Within (Oxford), said Obama's economic package for Pakistan's tribal areas has been well-received by Pakistanis. They are also behind the military initiative against the Taliban, being undertaken under U.S. pressure.
"The public is fed up with the Taliban but the anger can quite easily turn against the government and the U.S, given the dire situation of the internally displaced people."
Is all this doable? Cole, for one, thinks so. "Give Obama eight years, and things will look different."
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
17 Comments so far
Show AllI'm really tired of reading and hearing the President of the United States being referred to as the leader of the free world. Having the biggest military doesn't make the U.S. the leader of the world nor of the free world. Americans vote their president into power not the rest of us.
Obama will not confront Egypt in his speech. He will give vague platitudes and cliches that you can't tie him to -like Raygun.\
He will stand near the Suez Canal and restate the US domination, er, security of the Oceans and ports of the world. A sea port nation will dominate, er, expand liberalism.
He will talk wonderfully, but in the end, he will promise to expand the US involvement in the ME by way of Voice Corps and American Houses. "Institutional Democracy"....eight years of it?
Israel and India have been very generous to the Muslims and yet a handful of the Muslims abuse their generosity with all their terrorist activities. Obama knows that and is against allowing terrorism to prevail. The author should make it clear that he does or doesn't support terrorists before writing this sappy article. Afghanistan was doing better after the Taliban was crushed. We should have crushed them once and for all before getting into Iraq. Thankfully, Obama is getting back on schedule. If you leftists are going to complain about the Christian Right, why not show your anger against the Sharia Law as well? You can't have it both ways.
EncinoM,
yawn. You and MaxPain are quite connected, huh? Like, do you emanate from the exact same coordinates? Task on in any case! A great day to you both!
Azjoe, where do you get the idea that I and encinom are connected? You must be getting your coordinates all mixed up. Even Sioux Rose knows better than that. If you think I'm anything like EncinoM, you're sadly mistaken. There's a difference between people who write programs regardless of who uses them and people who actually do it with an evil pride. You need to be careful before misjudging others. For all that I know, my programming code probably got sold to even the owners of the progressive sites such as this one so that they could benefit from it and so could you. Just hang on and watch. Who knows when I'll get to post. I only do it when I'm free and in the mood. Geesh !
We are waging two wars! Looking to wage another with North Korea. Who are the bad folks on the planet right now? US!
There is a 'hot' war on Pakistan now. Soon Lebanon, Gaza and Iran as well.
Muslims & The Whole World Wait for Obama to Deliver - the Other Shoe
This is like Orwell's cataclysmic world view
published with the 'founding' of Israel.
The Muslims are doing just fine for the most part. The only Muslims who are impatient are those who are siding with the terrorists who are out to cause trouble and ruin the rest of the Muslims. Like the Hindus, Christians, and Jews, the Muslims will do just fine as long as they continue to shut up and be patient. Obama's not a god you know. He's not going to bomb Pakistan or Afghanistan. His job is to crush the Taliban. There may be a few civilian casualties involved but war has its costs and that's business. Sometimes, you have to shut up and compromise even if it means conceding. If you can't learn to do that then keep whining and stay a bedwetting purist. It's as simple as that.
Nebraska--Great satire but a bit over the top.
Rainborowe
Pakistanis "are behind the military offensive against the Taliban." Which Pakistanis?
The Pakistani National Army has evacuated millions into refugee camps, they attack their own people with jets, helicopters and heavy artillery.
They are financed by the US and do the US's bidding.
I find it hard to believe Pakistanis are "behind the military offensive," except for this- It's the Punjabi Army killing Pashtun Swatis and ethno-sectarian killing always has supporters.
Waiting for Godot!
What Obama has done is ratchet-up the wars in Muslim countries Afghanistan and Pakistan.
I'm a nonreligious secular humanist and I'm still waiting for Obama to deliver. He was the best candidate ever and even cynics like me who distrust political posturing thought his election would be a good thing.
It's now looking more and more like The Establishment found a product that could be packaged to appeal to those of us who would like to have some hope for the future and sold it to us, and are still doing so. He is an appealing television character and the best public speaker we've had in high office in a long time, but it does seem like, even at this short date (and we're well past that 100 days now) there ought to be more signs of that "change we can believe in" that a lot of us are seeing.
Muslims Wait for Obama to Deliver
And wait and wait and wait.
The Muslims are doing just fine for the most part and Obama's busy fixing it. You can't expect him to fix 8 years of damage in 4 months. As long as the Muslims behave themselves and stop terroring people of other religions, no one will get hurt.
Be interesting when he does speak, but I fear the 'paradigm' will be obama's ability to create more insurgents against the 'moral' U.S.A. because that is what 'moral' USA is so good at, talking down to those that have lost everything because they were all clumped into the 'terrorist' catagory whether they were just muslims instead of the radical fundamentalist types, like the government of izrael is, a bunch of fundamental terrorists who are just as or even more of a threat to the 'security' of the USA.
'"Beyond denying the Bush paradigm, he must develop his own positive paradigm. I haven't heard that articulated," said Cole'
Cole is incorrect. Obama DOES have his own paradigm: Do pretty much exactly what Bush did, but call it something else so that Obama-scrotum-licking liberals get on board.
'Cole, for one, thinks so. "Give Obama eight years, and things will look different."'
Yes, if you inhale enough helium, then things will certainly look different. They won't BE different, but they'll certainly look different.
--
Eric Patton
Cincinnati, OH
ebpatton@yahoo.com
True - why call it the Bush Paradigm instead of the Obama/Clinton paradigm?