If you want a brilliant attorney to defend the policies of Bush and Clinton to the Muslim world with eloquence and a sincere and studied respect for Muslim sentiments and sensitivity, you just can’t do better than Barack Hussein Obama, Esq. If you want a convincing statement that the new captain at the helm is determined not to repeat the mistakes of the past, then President Obama’s Cairo speech fell short. Close, but no cigar.
Mr. Obama is well aware that the Gallup poll of the Muslim world showed that a belief that Americans do not respect Islam was the number one concern. Was it not good that Obama took that head on, with a specific list of Muslim contributions to civilization and with a number of accurate and contextually valid quotes form the Qur’an? Of course, and the crowd showed it’s appreciation with shouts of “We love you!” The problem is that Obama had already made this point before. Of course, it doesn’t hurt to make it again. Just as Americans will never tire of hearing Muslims distance themselves from the 9/11 hijackers, so Muslims will never tire of hearing Americans acknowledge Islam’s tolerant and dynamic past. But Americans will also want to know when they can expect a tolerant and dynamic present from the Muslim world, and Muslims want to know when they can expect justice from the West.
We have to go beyond a respectful tone and commit ourselves to just action. Even when he said the right things, Obama sometimes said them the wrong way. I am not referring to the mispronunciation of “hijab” as “hajeeb” when he defended the right of Muslim women to decided whether they would wear one. The twisted tongue notwithstanding, that was a good example of a properly phrased concern for women’s rights. It reflected an appropriate opposition for any third party — especially the state — coming between the person and the Lord. It also showed a perfect-pitch sense of priorities, as he emphasized that the right to an education is a higher priority than fashion choice.
No, Obama was fine when he talked about things that happen to be America’s strong points, like its respect for women’s right to get an education and choose their own clothes. The unfortunate phrasing came when he got to America’s weak points. “America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election,” the attorney for defense boasted. The Arab-Muslim world desperately needed to hear Obama say that America would no longer encourage elections and then reject their outcome. Instead, he seemed to deny that we had ever done such a thing. “Ladies and gentlemen of the Muslim jury,” he seemed to say, “the Clinton administration is innocent of turning his back on arrest of the winners of the Algerian elections of the 1990s; the Bush administration did not encourage Fatah’s contemptuous dismissal of Mr. Haniyyah’s victory in the Palestinian elections.” We must forgive the Arab Muslim listener from wondering, why should we expect the America’s response to the next free and fair election to be any different? We need the president to renounce American interventionism, like the American trained troops assassinating Palestinian political leaders with the same self-assurance with which he condemns forcing women to wear or not wear the hijab.
The Muslim world needs to hear specifics about what America will do differently in the future. It is here that Obama fell short. Even as he admitted “the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically- elected Iranian government,” (President Eisenhower, having past on, apparently does need a defense attorney) and reasonably indicated that he would not deny Iran’s right to nuclear energy if Iran would comply with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, he gave no specifics as to what he wants Iran to do to satisfy him on this score.
More serious was his handling of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. Rejecting the legitimacy of settlements and calling for a two state solution is not new. Failing to mention the Palestinians’ right of return is an omission that promises more failure. Obama exemplifies his high tone when he says, “Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammad (peace be upon them) joined in prayer.” Then he undermines that tone with the scent of apartheid when he looks forward to “a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own.”
I stand by my opinion that Egypt was the wrong venue for this talk. The President’s vague calls for “transparency in government” fall far short of Moses’ frank speech to the Pharaoh of his day recounted in the Qur’an. It is true that Obama got a standing ovation at the end, and we expect no less from an audience of young University of Cairo students. However, even these enthusiasts gave Obama no applause when he mentioned that the first country on earth to recognize the United States of America was Morocco. Had he given the speech in Morocco, I guarantee you that line would have gotten applause.
Imad-ad-Dean Ahmad, Ph.D.
Minaret of Freedom Institute
www.minaret.org
