Obama has completed the third and final leg of his “Islamic World” ‘Odyssey’. In his speech from Turkey he stated that America was not at war with Islam. He visited Saudi Arabia, the ‘birth place of Islam’, for advice from his majesty, King Abdullah, on how to address the “Islamic World” on issues including but not restricted to, Democracy, Womens rights and tolerence.
He ended his tour, in Cairo, where extreme security measures were undertaken, where students were pre-emptively arrested, detained and huge security measures enforced in the City leaving the city with one of the most densely populated cities in the World, with empty streets.
Whilst many commentators have welcomed his open approach, his olive branch to Iran on Nayruz, to the Arabs and Muslim majority countries calling for mutual interests and murual respect to be reknewed, his shift from militant rhetoric, his recognition of Muslim contributions to America and the World at large, and his assertion that he will close down Guantanomo bay etc, other commentators have rasied legitimate concerns.
Strangely Tariq Ramadhan suggested that he has avoided using binary language, whilst others have correctly commented on Obama’s repeated usage of phrases such as the “Islamic world”, and the “Muslim world” which as Amir Taheri explained, in The Times has pointed out, feeds into the mindset and political language of Islamists, in creating a polarized world of Muslims and the ‘other’. This is obviously not intentional but addressing the “Muslim world” in such a manner is not advisable, and it would appear that the FCO in the UK lead by Miliband (for how long, who knows) is following suit.
It is also a little incogruous to say the least, that he sought advice from his Majesty King Abdullah on issues that he was seeking to address. Saudi Arabia has never been a shining example of Democracy nor has it a reputation as an advocate of womens rights. I don’t think that this needs exemplifying, but I am open to correction. The treatment of non-Wahabi Muslims, let alone non-Muslims is exemplerary of Saudi understandings of tolerance.
The same criticism is levelled against him with regards Egypt. Mubarak, who got an impressive 88.6% of the votes in the 2005 “elections”, has been in power since October the 14th 1981 and has maintained “emergency law” throughout, which has been in place since 1967! These “laws” include, such measures as circumscribing non-governmental political activity, demonstrations, and have facilitated important stabilizing measures, such as imprisoning the leading opposition party leaderships calling for secular democratic reform. Ayman Nour for example was arrested and imprisoned for election fraud (he got an unbelievable 7.3% of the vote and came in second, and was released this February on Health grounds).
This is the Egypt and Mubarak that Obama has praised for being an ally and a stabilizing force in the Middle-East. This is a model of Democracy that though different to the US model, as Obama put it, was a Democracy nonetheless, and Obama stated we couldn’t expect it to deal only with countries “meeting all our criteria for Democracy”. He does have a point. But then even Saddam Hussain won 100% of the vote in 2002, and arguably may have met some of the “criteria”.
Obama has asked for time. Time to resolve the Middle East problem, to resolve the worlds nuclear proliferation problem, bring peace and harmony to the galaxy and end this destructive conflict…
Hmmmm. I still hope, and want to believe that there will be much good from this new American leadership, and indeed there are reasons to be hopeful. Gestures have been made, more than just rheotoric, though the battle for the hearts and minds of Muslim audiences apears to be raging, with al-Qaeda being fully engaged. But let’s hope that realistic strategies which can bring actual change, further democracy, further human rights and womens rights in particular, are brought forward soon. Losing hearts and minds after they have been won over, can only make the task more difficult.
One Comment
While I hate it that westerners sometime actually BELIEVE these countries are democratic and moderate, like Richard Cohen (although its’ the opposite but you get the point), I believe it’s necessery to PRETEND they are. with the Cold War and it’s effects mutating around the world, with countries obtaining and having nuclear weapons (Iran, Pakistan etc…), and with the tention between the main players of the region (SA and Iran) you HAVE to choose a side (unless you’re Sweeden
), it’s inevitable. So what do you do? Choose the lesser of two eviles and hope they might become even lesser evil in the futer.