Obama shouldn't let his speech to the 'Muslim world' be as much of a missed opportunity as his speech to Europe was
James Forsyth 6:24pm
Barack Obama’s speech in Cairo next month is being hyped as a major part of his administration’s outreach to the ‘Muslim world’. One can only hope that it is a better, more realistic speech than the one Obama gave in Berlin last July setting out how trans-Atlantic relations could be improved. In that speech, Obama missed a huge opportunity to tell the Europeans that even he—a candidate who was favoured by European elites and publics by huge margins—thought they were shirking their responsibilities in Afghanistan. He should have made clear that America listening more would not by itself solve anywhere near all of the problems in the alliance.
In the same way, it would be disappointing if the Cairo speech did not make clear that the single biggest impediment to progress in the ‘Muslim world’, and I know that phrase obscures almost as much as it reveals, is a lack of freedom for its peoples and accountability for its rulers. To devote more of the speech to the Israel / Palestine issue, important thought that it is, than this fact would be to dance to the tune that the autocrats of the region have been playing for too long, at great cost to us all.
PS I’ve been remiss in not mentioning this before, but Conservative Cabbie—a frequent and incisive commenter here—now has his own blog. It is well worth a look.
Previous
sean
May 30th, 2009 7:04pm Report this commentHorrible article, What more do you want from the man. In climates. plz
porkbelly
May 30th, 2009 7:15pm Report this commentObama has been practicing diligently and will deliver the speech in fluent Arslikhanese.
Bill Markley
May 30th, 2009 7:27pm Report this commentI agree with you, Mr. Forsyth, but Obama appears hell-bent on being friendly to Islam at the expense of encouraging freedom. Arab dictatorships are of course responsible for much resentment amongst their populations, but the most powerful alternative in those countries seems to be radical Islam, which would institute another form of oppressiveness under Sharia laws. Western-oriented Arab liberals were encouraged by some of George W. Bush's speeches and policies, but Obama seems more interested in courting Islamists who ultimately won't allow more freedom. Bush also courted Arab dictatorships, but at least he paid more lip service to freedom.
Its getting very messy. Obama is backing Israel into a corner by trying to quickly force a "solution" with the Palestinians before confronting Iran. As a result, Israel is quietly working with Arab countries to counter the Iranian threat. Yet the longer Obama dithers about Iran and the more he slaps Israel in the face, the more Hezbollah and other Iranian proxies will be encouraged. With whatever words Obama utters, I don't see him encouraging much freedom by his actions.
Susan Hill
May 30th, 2009 8:45pm Report this commentDon`t worry James.. Pete told us about Conservative Cabbie`s blog weeks ago. Do keep up !
Austin Barry
May 30th, 2009 9:15pm Report this commentIt would be good if Obama were to robustly mark the cards of the misogynistic, homophobic, caliphate-expansionist Dar-al Islam. But he won't. It'll be more of the limp-wristed, outreach, why-can't-we-be-buddies nonsense. They have the oil, so we have to reciprocate with endless accommodations, cash and Nelsonic-blind-eye bullshit homilies. We should be ashamed.
Verity
May 30th, 2009 10:47pm Report this commentAustin Barry - Well said. But the United States also has oil. Billions and billions of gallons of reserves. But the greenies lobby against them drilling for it.
London Calling
May 31st, 2009 8:13am Report this commentNow is the time that all Muslim leaders embraced a way forward and discussed various issues but most importantly their wisdom in dealing with global terrorism, it is their duty to do so for to avoid these issues would be a great error.
Greater understanding is required...I hope that is achieved, for it is misunderstanding that has prevailed to date...
Peace be upon you all...
Verity
May 31st, 2009 2:09pm Report this commentBill Markley writes: "Arab dictatorships are of course responsible for much resentment amongst their populations,".
They are?
In which countries in particular would that be? If a country is being run in the manner dictated by their prophet, and most of them are, there can be no resentment. A theocracy's a theocracy and your received wisdom is wishful thinking.
Bill Markley
May 31st, 2009 5:30pm Report this commentObama doesn't value freedom highly, except for those who are his cronies, so he won't be a true force for freedom no matter what he says in Cairo.
Verity, I'm not sure what you mean. What I tried to say was that both "secular" dictators and those who want Sharia are oppressive. Neither the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, the Saudi King nor Mubarak want freedom for their countries. We've seen that in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Jordan, the West Bank, Gaza and elsewhere. I'm not in favor of the secular dictators or those who want Sharia.
Conservative Cabbie
June 1st, 2009 9:44am Report this commentJames
Thankyou for the link.
"the single biggest impediment to progress in the ‘Muslim world’...is a lack of freedom for its peoples and accountability for its rulers."
I couldn't agree with this more. Obama's outreach and hand of empathy to the muslim world will only be of value if this expectation is expressly made. With a new face in the White House, there is an opportunity to reboot the wests relationship with the muslim world but it needs to be a firm condition, not part of a wishlist or a starting point for negotiation.
Will we see an Obama doctrine coming out of this speech, and if so, what will it be? Or will Obama's strategy be one of realpolitick?
Verity
June 1st, 2009 3:23pm Report this commentBill Markley - Here is what you wrote: "Arab dictatorships are of course responsible for much resentment amongst their populations."
I asked you to name one country. Tell me where there is unrest againt their own rulers in the Arab world.
BTW, there are no "secular dictators" in Islamic countries.
Bill Markley
June 1st, 2009 7:14pm Report this commentVerity: Egypt, Algeria, Syria, and Libya are all Arabic-speaking countries with relatively secular and oppressive governments. Its not accurate to call them theocracies. Their leaders profess to be Muslims, but they do not rule as theocrats. Like Saddam Hussein did in Iraq, they will use Islam for manipulative purposes, but they will also rule as Baathists or other types of Socialists or Nationalists.
All of those countries that I listed above have had major unrest. There have been many thousands killed in Algeria and Egypt within the last few decades. Islamicists such as the Muslim Brotherhood oppose these governments. Western-oriented liberals also oppose the governments, but they don't seem to be large in numbers. I think its fine to fight against Islamicists, but the dictators don't stop there.
Alexandra
June 2nd, 2009 2:36pm Report this commentThe Speech Obama should Give in Cairo
By Robert Spencer
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/06/the_speech_obama_should_give_i.html
Wonderful.
Bill Markley
June 2nd, 2009 3:28pm Report this commentAmen, Alexandra! Robert Spencer provides a great service, especially with his Jihadwatch.org.
Back to top