SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Strikingly, Saudi Arabia, one of the most repressive countries in the Arab world and a key US ally and oil supplier, got not a single mention in the 5,400-word speech. On Bahrain - "a long-standing partner" (and home to the US fifth fleet) - there was no sense that locking up the opposition would be punished by the US. (AFP/Jim Watson)
Barack Obama Signals Selective US Response to 'Arab Spring'
President declares support for human rights in Middle East speech but makes no mention of Saudi Arabia
May 19, 2011
Barack Obama's speech on the Middle East was a belated response to extraordinary events over which the US has so far exercised precious little influence.
The president lavished praise on the spirit of people power that has animated this year's "Arab spring" but also made clear that direct US involvement in the region would remain selective.
Billions of dollars in debt relief and loans for post-revolutionary Egypt and Tunisia will be a boost for troubled economies, though it will not erase the memory of long years of US support for their now deposed dictators, Hosni Mubarak and Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali.
Strikingly, Saudi Arabia, one of the most repressive countries in the Arab world and a key US ally and oil supplier, got not a single mention in the 5,400-word speech.
Nor did Obama offer any really new ideas on the Israeli-Palestinian impasse, reiterating the "unshakeable" US commitment to Israel's security. Support for the 1967 border has long been the basis for any workable settlement, even if mention of it annoys Israeli right-wingers. It was clearly intended as a sharp reminder to Binyamin Netanyahu of where the parameters lie.
The president's ringing declaration of support for Arab human rights was tempered by careful anticipation of the charge that US policies are inconsistent or selective policies. America could not "prevent every injustice perpetrated by a regime against its people", but in Libya the prospect was one of imminent massacre by Muammar Gaddafi's forces. Still, he gave no clues on future strategy in Libya.
Obama had harsh words for Bashar al-Assad of Syria, where hundreds have been killed by the security forces, but he did not address the reason why Libyan logic did not apply, and why Syria's dictator should not also be removed.
Iran was rebuked for its "hypocrisy" in supporting Arab protests abroad while crushing them at home. On Bahrain - "a long-standing partner" (and home to the US fifth fleet) - there was no sense that locking up the opposition would be punished by the US.
Netanyahu will be pleased at Obama's exclusion of the Palestinian movement Hamas as a negotiating partner. Overall, though, the US president did not go beyond what he said on the conflict in his big Cairo speech in June 2009. But he was right to repeat the now familiar mantra: "The status quo is unsustainable, and Israel too must act boldly to advance a lasting peace."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Barack Obama's speech on the Middle East was a belated response to extraordinary events over which the US has so far exercised precious little influence.
The president lavished praise on the spirit of people power that has animated this year's "Arab spring" but also made clear that direct US involvement in the region would remain selective.
Billions of dollars in debt relief and loans for post-revolutionary Egypt and Tunisia will be a boost for troubled economies, though it will not erase the memory of long years of US support for their now deposed dictators, Hosni Mubarak and Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali.
Strikingly, Saudi Arabia, one of the most repressive countries in the Arab world and a key US ally and oil supplier, got not a single mention in the 5,400-word speech.
Nor did Obama offer any really new ideas on the Israeli-Palestinian impasse, reiterating the "unshakeable" US commitment to Israel's security. Support for the 1967 border has long been the basis for any workable settlement, even if mention of it annoys Israeli right-wingers. It was clearly intended as a sharp reminder to Binyamin Netanyahu of where the parameters lie.
The president's ringing declaration of support for Arab human rights was tempered by careful anticipation of the charge that US policies are inconsistent or selective policies. America could not "prevent every injustice perpetrated by a regime against its people", but in Libya the prospect was one of imminent massacre by Muammar Gaddafi's forces. Still, he gave no clues on future strategy in Libya.
Obama had harsh words for Bashar al-Assad of Syria, where hundreds have been killed by the security forces, but he did not address the reason why Libyan logic did not apply, and why Syria's dictator should not also be removed.
Iran was rebuked for its "hypocrisy" in supporting Arab protests abroad while crushing them at home. On Bahrain - "a long-standing partner" (and home to the US fifth fleet) - there was no sense that locking up the opposition would be punished by the US.
Netanyahu will be pleased at Obama's exclusion of the Palestinian movement Hamas as a negotiating partner. Overall, though, the US president did not go beyond what he said on the conflict in his big Cairo speech in June 2009. But he was right to repeat the now familiar mantra: "The status quo is unsustainable, and Israel too must act boldly to advance a lasting peace."
Barack Obama's speech on the Middle East was a belated response to extraordinary events over which the US has so far exercised precious little influence.
The president lavished praise on the spirit of people power that has animated this year's "Arab spring" but also made clear that direct US involvement in the region would remain selective.
Billions of dollars in debt relief and loans for post-revolutionary Egypt and Tunisia will be a boost for troubled economies, though it will not erase the memory of long years of US support for their now deposed dictators, Hosni Mubarak and Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali.
Strikingly, Saudi Arabia, one of the most repressive countries in the Arab world and a key US ally and oil supplier, got not a single mention in the 5,400-word speech.
Nor did Obama offer any really new ideas on the Israeli-Palestinian impasse, reiterating the "unshakeable" US commitment to Israel's security. Support for the 1967 border has long been the basis for any workable settlement, even if mention of it annoys Israeli right-wingers. It was clearly intended as a sharp reminder to Binyamin Netanyahu of where the parameters lie.
The president's ringing declaration of support for Arab human rights was tempered by careful anticipation of the charge that US policies are inconsistent or selective policies. America could not "prevent every injustice perpetrated by a regime against its people", but in Libya the prospect was one of imminent massacre by Muammar Gaddafi's forces. Still, he gave no clues on future strategy in Libya.
Obama had harsh words for Bashar al-Assad of Syria, where hundreds have been killed by the security forces, but he did not address the reason why Libyan logic did not apply, and why Syria's dictator should not also be removed.
Iran was rebuked for its "hypocrisy" in supporting Arab protests abroad while crushing them at home. On Bahrain - "a long-standing partner" (and home to the US fifth fleet) - there was no sense that locking up the opposition would be punished by the US.
Netanyahu will be pleased at Obama's exclusion of the Palestinian movement Hamas as a negotiating partner. Overall, though, the US president did not go beyond what he said on the conflict in his big Cairo speech in June 2009. But he was right to repeat the now familiar mantra: "The status quo is unsustainable, and Israel too must act boldly to advance a lasting peace."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.