Thursday, April 24 2014

President Obama's remarks on the "Arab Spring"



 There’s coverage in the papers today on President Obama’s speech at the US State Department yesterday on the US response to the Arab Spring.
 

President Obama set out to “talk about this change – the forces that are driving it and how we can respond in a way that advances our values and strengthens our security.”

Excerpts from the speech can be read below:

“There are times in the course of history when the actions of ordinary citizens spark movements for change because they speak to a longing for freedom that has been building up for years.  In America, think of the defiance of those patriots in Boston who refused to pay taxes to a King, or the dignity of Rosa Parks as she sat courageously in her seat.  So it was in Tunisia, as that vendor’s act of desperation tapped into the frustration felt throughout the country.  Hundreds of protesters took to the streets, then thousands.  And in the face of batons and sometimes bullets, they refused to go home –- day after day, week after week -- until a dictator of more than two decades finally left power.

“The story of this revolution, and the ones that followed, should not have come as a surprise.  The nations of the Middle East and North Africa won their independence long ago, but in too many places their people did not.  In too many countries, power has been concentrated in the hands of a few.  In too many countries, a citizen like that young vendor had nowhere to turn  -– no honest judiciary to hear his case; no independent media to give him voice; no credible political party to represent his views; no free and fair election where he could choose his leader.

[...]

“Of course, change of this magnitude does not come easily.  In our day and age -– a time of 24-hour news cycles and constant communication –- people expect the transformation of the region to be resolved in a matter of weeks.  But it will be years before this story reaches its end.  Along the way, there will be good days and there will bad days.  In some places, change will be swift; in others, gradual.  And as we’ve already seen, calls for change may give way, in some cases, to fierce contests for power.

“The question before us is what role America will play as this story unfolds.  For decades, the United States has pursued a set of core interests in the region:  countering terrorism and stopping the spread of nuclear weapons; securing the free flow of commerce and safe-guarding the security of the region; standing up for Israel’s security and pursuing Arab-Israeli peace.

“Yet we must acknowledge that a strategy based solely upon the narrow pursuit of these interests will not fill an empty stomach or allow someone to speak their mind.  Moreover, failure to speak to the broader aspirations of ordinary people will only feed the suspicion that has festered for years that the United States pursues our interests at their expense.  Given that this mistrust runs both ways –- as Americans have been seared by hostage-taking and violent rhetoric and terrorist attacks that have killed thousands of our citizens -– a failure to change our approach threatens a deepening spiral of division between the United States and the Arab world.

“And that’s why, two years ago in Cairo, I began to broaden our engagement based upon mutual interests and mutual respect.  I believed then -– and I believe now -– that we have a stake not just in the stability of nations, but in the self-determination of individuals.  The status quo is not sustainable.  Societies held together by fear and repression may offer the illusion of stability for a time, but they are built upon fault lines that will eventually tear asunder.

“So we face a historic opportunity.  We have the chance to show that America values the dignity of the street vendor in Tunisia more than the raw power of the dictator.  There must be no doubt that the United States of America welcomes change that advances self-determination and opportunity.  Yes, there will be perils that accompany this moment of promise.  But after decades of accepting the world as it is in the region, we have a chance to pursue the world as it should be.

“The United States opposes the use of violence and repression against the people of the region. 

“The United States supports a set of universal rights.  And these rights include free speech, the freedom of peaceful assembly, the freedom of religion, equality for men and women under the rule of law, and the right to choose your own leaders  -– whether you live in Baghdad or Damascus, Sanaa or Tehran.

“And we support political and economic reform in the Middle East and North Africa that can meet the legitimate aspirations of ordinary people throughout the region.

“Our support for these principles is not a secondary interest.  Today I want to make it clear that it is a top priority that must be translated into concrete actions, and supported by all of the diplomatic, economic and strategic tools at our disposal.

[...]

“So in the months ahead, America must use all our influence to encourage reform in the region.  Even as we acknowledge that each country is different, we need to speak honestly about the principles that we believe in, with friend and foe alike.  Our message is simple:  If you take the risks that reform entails, you will have the full support of the United States.

“For the fact is, real reform does not come at the ballot box alone.  Through our efforts we must support those basic rights to speak your mind and access information.  We will support open access to the Internet, and the right of journalists to be heard -– whether it’s a big news organization or a lone blogger.  In the 21st century, information is power, the truth cannot be hidden, and the legitimacy of governments will ultimately depend on active and informed citizens.

“Such open discourse is important even if what is said does not square with our worldview.  Let me be clear, America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard, even if we disagree with them.  And sometimes we profoundly disagree with them.

“We look forward to working with all who embrace genuine and inclusive democracy.  What we will oppose is an attempt by any group to restrict the rights of others, and to hold power through coercion and not consent.  Because democracy depends not only on elections, but also strong and accountable institutions, and the respect for the rights of minorities.

“Such tolerance is particularly important when it comes to religion.  In Tahrir Square, we heard Egyptians from all walks of life chant, “Muslims, Christians, we are one.”  America will work to see that this spirit prevails -– that all faiths are respected, and that bridges are built among them.  In a region that was the birthplace of three world religions, intolerance can lead only to suffering and stagnation.  And for this season of change to succeed, Coptic Christians must have the right to worship freely in Cairo, just as Shia must never have their mosques destroyed in Bahrain.

“What is true for religious minorities is also true when it comes to the rights of women.  History shows that countries are more prosperous and more peaceful when women are empowered.  And that’s why we will continue to insist that universal rights apply to women as well as men -– by focusing assistance on child and maternal health; by helping women to teach, or start a business; by standing up for the right of women to have their voices heard, and to run for office.  The region will never reach its full potential when more than half of its population is prevented from achieving their full potential.

“The greatest untapped resource in the Middle East and North Africa is the talent of its people.  In the recent protests, we see that talent on display, as people harness technology to move the world.  It’s no coincidence that one of the leaders of Tahrir Square was an executive for Google.  That energy now needs to be channeled, in country after country, so that economic growth can solidify the accomplishments of the street.  For just as democratic revolutions can be triggered by a lack of individual opportunity, successful democratic transitions depend upon an expansion of growth and broad-based prosperity.

“So, drawing from what we’ve learned around the world, we think it’s important to focus on trade, not just aid; on investment, not just assistance.  The goal must be a model in which protectionism gives way to openness, the reigns of commerce pass from the few to the many, and the economy generates jobs for the young.  America’s support for democracy will therefore be based on ensuring financial stability, promoting reform, and integrating competitive markets with each other and the global economy.  And we’re going to start with Tunisia and Egypt.

[...]

“Let me conclude by talking about another cornerstone of our approach to the region, and that relates to the pursuit of peace.

“For decades, the conflict between Israelis and Arabs has cast a shadow over the region.  For Israelis, it has meant living with the fear that their children could be blown up on a bus or by rockets fired at their homes, as well as the pain of knowing that other children in the region are taught to hate them.  For Palestinians, it has meant suffering the humiliation of occupation, and never living in a nation of their own.  Moreover, this conflict has come with a larger cost to the Middle East, as it impedes partnerships that could bring greater security and prosperity and empowerment to ordinary people.

“Now, ultimately, it is up to the Israelis and Palestinians to take action.  No peace can be imposed upon them -- not by the United States; not by anybody else.  But endless delay won’t make the problem go away.  What America and the international community can do is to state frankly what everyone knows -- a lasting peace will involve two states for two peoples:  Israel as a Jewish state and the homeland for the Jewish people, and the state of Palestine as the homeland for the Palestinian people, each state enjoying self-determination, mutual recognition, and peace.

“So while the core issues of the conflict must be negotiated, the basis of those negotiations is clear:  a viable Palestine, a secure Israel.  The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine.  We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states.  The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their full potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state.

“Now, let me say this:  Recognizing that negotiations need to begin with the issues of territory and security does not mean that it will be easy to come back to the table.  In particular, the recent announcement of an agreement between Fatah and Hamas raises profound and legitimate questions for Israel:  How can one negotiate with a party that has shown itself unwilling to recognize your right to exist?  And in the weeks and months to come, Palestinian leaders will have to provide a credible answer to that question.  Meanwhile, the United States, our Quartet partners, and the Arab states will need to continue every effort to get beyond the current impasse.”


The full speech can be read here.

The Independent editorial today refers to the speech as “a disappointing sequel to the historic Cairo speech."

The editorial takes up the US’s mixed response to the Arab Spring, late and inconsistent, and questions the whether the country’s economic interests and its political values are not pulling in opposite directions despite Obama’s messages.

The editorial also notes the absence of any firmness on the part of the US in relation to the illegal settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories which continue to impede any prospect of a two state solution based on the 1967 borders. It also picks up on the recent unity pact agreed by Fatah and Hamas observing;

“Though he chided Israel for its policy of continuing to build new settlements on Arab land, however, there was no suggestion that Washington is about to take the tougher line that is required. Rather he appeared to endorse Israeli reservations about talking to the Palestinians now that the two main Palestinian factions, Fatah and Hamas, have come together. Mr Obama placed the ball firmly in the Palestinians' court, requiring Hamas now to recognise, as it should, the right of Israel to exist. But he should also have said that, when that happens, Israel must negotiate with a Palestinian movement that includes Hamas. There would no longer be any reason to shun that group of Palestinian opinion.

“This was billed as Barack Obama's most important speech on the Middle East since his Cairo speech two years ago, when he called for a new beginning in relations between the US and the Muslim world. It did not deliver. We can only hope that behind the scenes he is doing a good deal more.”


Ian Black in The Guardian points out that “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.”

While the Guardian editorial goes further and argues that “Mr Obama's attempts to sketch a narrative which wove a line between America's past role in the Middle East and its future, which distinguished between the dictators of countries that merited western military intervention, such as Libya, and those like Syria that did not – and his claims that US pressure is curbing the repressive actions of allies in Bahrain and Yemen – were singularly unconvincing.”

The Guardian editorial notes other failings in the policies sketched out in Obama’s speech, principally on the Middle East conflict, noting that “Mr Obama was right to say that the status quo is untenable. He has yet to see how many aspects of his policy maintain it.”

Robert Fisk in The Independent picks up on another anomaly contained in the speech, the presence of Palestinian Arabs in the Jewish State:

“…the reference to the "Jewish state" was obviously intended to make Netanyahu happy. Last time I went there, there were hundreds of thousands of Arabs who lived in Israel, all of them with Israeli passports. They didn't get a reference from Obama. Or maybe I was just imagining.”

We'd welcome your thoughts on President Obama's speech - post your comments below.









Last Updated on Friday, 20 May 2011 15:55

Comments

 
0 #2 US Cuckoo & the Arab streetTruth Hurts 2011-05-25 17:20
The volte-face is full of chutzpah ;-)

It was the ordinary people who were fed up who were with the Western supported Firawn. The billions of $ that entrenched the State security apparatus & led to specialization of sodomy in proto-Abu Ghraibs. The emulation of the Latin American Dirty War Operation Condor is striking.

Where were the calls for democracy, listening to people, pressure BEFORE the revolution? Islamic organisations & even AQ (brains Al-Zawahiri) were speaking up against neo-colonial US proxies in the style of the Shah. Silence speaks volumes i.e. Machiavellian Expedient Opportunism.

Just like Saddam, & now the Gulf Sheiks & Central Asian despots etc, the CIA maxim they are our b*st*rds.

As for Palestine, why impose a 2 state solution, why recognise a "Jewish" state instead of an Enlightenment one of all its citizens, if they are your genuine values? Why an unequal de-militarized unsecure Palestine? What about the Israeli state's respect for all the religious places that they have destroyed? Why not mention the proprotionally greater threat of Palestinians seeing bombs flatten their houses & the enemy children hating the children who ghave been ethnically cleansed? Why is Israel exempt from signing the NPT, unlike signatory Iran, exceptionalist supremacism for the rogue Apartheid state?

The US MIC is behaving like a cuckoo stealing the nest of other's efforts, but the Orwellian re-writing of history down the Memory Hole is even worse!
Quote | Report to administrator
 
 
0 #1 MrIsmail 2011-05-20 20:46
Arabs should not stay and wait for US to solve the Palestinian's problem, as the whole is seeing that US always fovouring the Jews and fighting for their interest. So what credible action can we expect from American government that will be beneficial to Palestinians, absolutely nothing. The most disappointing thing is the Arabs are standing by Us against their brothers in all respect. Hamas has right to join with Fattah to form a solid alliance for the interest of their people, if anyone is against that then that's their own proble; but Hamas and Fattah should be together that is right thing to do.
Quote | Report to administrator
 

This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
If you are experiencing problems please contact info@iengage.org.uk

Engage Publications



Books of Interest