Video
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feed
Obama's Cairo-Muslim Strategy
ISLAM AND THE WEST
By Daniel Brumberg
Q: There are a lot of Muslims who look at the leadership of Egypt warily...Is...this is a bad selection (for President Obama's speech to the Muslim world)?
Press Secretary GIBBS: (Egypt)...is the heart of Arab world...This is a speech to many, many people and a continuing effort by this President ...to demonstrate how we can work together to ensure the safety and security and the future well-being....of the Muslim world.
Q: I guess my only point is there are a lot of Muslims who think of... the Egyptian leaders as part of the problem.
GIBBS: This is not about who the leaders might be of any certain country; this is about the...common progress that we can make to strengthen that relationship and fight extremists.
***********************************************
The above exchange with White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs sums up the countervailing pressures that President Obama faces as he prepares for his June 4 speech to the Muslim world. As I understand it, the original purpose of the speech was to offer a master vision of how to narrow the cultural, ideological and political breach between the U.S. and the Muslim world. To highlight these grand themes, some officials proposed that Obama travel to the land of his youth: Indonesia.
But an increasingly dangerous geo-strategic landscape in the Middle East has led officials to rethink the very purpose of the speech. Instead of traveling to Jakarta, Obama will fly to Cairo. There he will do his best--as one observer puts it--to "boost Egypt's standing by placing it at the center of a coalition to isolate Iran and bring about peace...between Israel and the entire Muslim world."
In short, it appears that the administration will subordinate a wider discussion of U.S.-Muslim relations to a narrower focus on security issues, even if this effort has the unintended effect of strengthening an autocratic regime that many Egyptians view "as part of the problem."
Foreign policy is about trade-offs, and in this case, the administration's strategy makes some sense. Dismay over the U.S. failure to push for a lasting two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is the single most important factor uniting the diverse peoples, cultures and societies of the Muslim world.
To counter this collective resentment, Jordan's king advocates a "57-state solution" based on achieving peace between Israel and all 57 members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference. The strategic goal behind this ambitious initiative is to confront Iran with a fundamental choice between supporting Arab-Israeli peace or opposing the governments of the entire Muslim (Sunni) world.
But, we must tread carefully. If, in pursuing a new peace strategy, Washington embraces any Arab regime - no matter how corrupt or autocratic--the U.S. will undercut its long-term interest in addressing the many issues affecting America's relations with the Muslim world.
How can we secure the support of political leader and also signal that the Washington's Muslim world agenda runs deeper than a one-dimensional quest for safety or security?
Press Secretary Gibbs hints at part of the answer when he insists that Obama's Cairo speech will be directed at "peoples" rather than governments. But this is only a start.
If the President wants his words to be heard from the dusty alleyways of Cairo to the skyscrapers of Kuala Lumpur, Obama must insist that the U.S. effort to counter Islamist extremists by promoting Palestinian-Israeli peace is part and parcel of a wider strategy for helping governments and oppositions confront a myriad of complex domestic challenges.
These challenges include the enduring task of building political institutions that give a real voice to the voiceless. Unless the problem of representation is addressed directly, the already wide gap between regimes and their dispirited publics will only widen. This is a recipe for insecurity that Washington and its Muslim world allies can ill afford.
Daniel Brumberg is Associate Professor in the Department of Government at Georgetown University, and Acting Director of the Muslim World Initiative at the United States Institute of Peace.
By Daniel Brumberg |
May 19, 2009; 1:11 PM ET
| Category:
Islam and the West
Save & Share:
Previous: End Game in Sri Lanka |
Next: Welcome to FAITH COMPLEX: First Guest: Asra Nomani
Posted by: walter-in-fallschurch | May 21, 2009 2:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Mr. Brumberg says:
“Obama must insist that the U.S. effort to counter Islamist extremists by promoting Palestinian-Israeli peace is part and parcel of a wider strategy for helping governments and oppositions confront a myriad of complex domestic challenges.”
Autocratic rule is a Muslim culture. That is why in most of those countries, especially the Arab ones amongst them, are ruled by dictators for life and who more often than not are succeeded by their sons. Islamists have not demonstrated any evidence of a better vision for solving any of the entrenched problems of illiteracy, poverty, corruption that infect their societies. They gain their support from among the downtrodden masses by promising general and vague solutions which they, among most others, know they cannot deliver.
Obama can help marginalize the Islamist parties first by denying them the grievance card against the USA for its undiscriminating support of Israel. Second by helping the present leaders build institutions that are responding to the people's sense of freedom, liberty and justice. This might require massive technological and educational aid program similar to the Marshall plan. The oil rich countries of the Middle East need to partner with us in this project.
Posted by: abhab | May 20, 2009 2:07 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Is paganism/Wicca also considered a book religion??
From the Book of Wikipedia :))
"Wicca (pronounced /ˈwɪkə/) is a neopagan, nature-based[1] religion. It was popularised in 1954 by Gerald Gardner, a retired British civil servant, who at the time called it Witchcraft and its adherents "the Wica".[2]
Wiccans, as followers of Wicca are now commonly known, typically worship a God[3] (traditionally the Horned God) and a Goddess (traditionally the Triple Goddess), who are sometimes represented as being a part of a greater pantheistic Godhead, and as manifesting themselves as various polytheistic deities. Other characteristics of Wicca include the ritual use of magic, a liberal code of morality and the celebration of eight seasonal-based festivals.
There is dispute as to what actually constitutes Wicca. Initially, it referred to the lineage of one of Gardner's rivals, Charles Cardell,[4] although in the 1960s it began to refer instead only to lineages stemming from Gardner and operating as initiatory Mystery Priesthoods (such as Gardnerian and Alexandrian Wicca). These are now collectively known in North America as British Traditional Wicca.[5] A third usage, which has grown in popularity in recent years, and which was debatably the original usage,[6] considers Wicca to include other forms of Goddess-oriented neopagan witchcraft that are similar to but independent of that lineage, including Cochrane's Craft, Dianic Wicca and the 1734 Tradition; these are sometimes collectively termed Eclectic Wicca.[7][8][9]"
Posted by: CCNL | May 20, 2009 12:11 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Welp. Can't help but notice that when the various Book-religions try to make it about religious cultures, you kids just can't seem to get along. Maybe focusing on some practicalities could start working again.
Posted by: Paganplace | May 19, 2009 7:31 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The foundations of Judaism, Christianity and Islam are severely flawed. Promulgate these flaws 24/7 and most of the problems will disappear.
Posted by: CCNL | May 19, 2009 6:28 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.
the 57-state solution! i confess i had not heard of that. but that's really what we're up against. israel, because "it's jewish" has to make peace with 56 "muslim" countries. the very fact that we can say "muslim countries" shows how retarded the whole thing is.
i love obama's nuanced thinking, and how he's willing to change his mind. going to egypt first i think is good. the big "muslim problem" is israel/palestine. though, why doesn't he go speak in palestine?
QUESTIONs FOR MUSLIMS: (seriously, please answer)
are jews worse than christians? i mean i know they're both "people of the book", but are jews worse - in scripture or interpretations?
if israel were moved to say, guam or something, would "islam" be "ok with" israel? i mean, is the problem the existence of israel, or israel's presence on "muslim land"?