« Time to Look Past Obama’s Words and Face-up to His Actions, U.S. Foreign Policy Continues Rapidly in the Wrong Direction The Peace Movement Needs to Escalate Anti-War ActionsForget 'Negotiations', Obama, The Situation Cries Out For Law and Justice »

A Bush In Sheep's Clothing

June 4th, 2009

By ALI ABUNIMAH

Obama's speech shows little real change. In most regards his analysis maintains flawed American policies

Once you strip away the mujamalat – the courtesies exchanged between guest and host – the substance of President Obama's speech in Cairo indicates there is likely to be little real change in US policy. It is not necessary to divine Obama's intentions – he may be utterly sincere and I believe he is. It is his analysis and prescriptions that in most regards maintain flawed American policies intact.

Though he pledged to "speak the truth as best I can", there was much the president left out. He spoke of tension between "America and Islam" – the former a concrete specific place, the latter a vague construct subsuming peoples, practices, histories and countries more varied than similar.

Labelling America's "other" as a nebulous and all-encompassing "Islam" (even while professing rapprochement and respect) is a way to avoid acknowledging what does in fact unite and mobilise people across many Muslim-majority countries: overwhelming popular opposition to increasingly intrusive and violent American military, political and economic interventions in many of those countries. This opposition – and the resistance it generates – has now become for supporters of those interventions, synonymous with "Islam".

It was disappointing that Obama recycled his predecessor's notion that "violent extremism" exists in a vacuum, unrelated to America's (and its proxies') exponentially greater use of violence before and after September 11, 2001. He dwelled on the "enormous trauma" done to the US when almost 3,000 people were killed that day, but spoke not one word about the hundreds of thousands of orphans and widows left in Iraq – those whom Munathar al-Zaidi's flying shoe forced Americans to remember only for a few seconds last year. He ignored the dozens of civilians who die each week in the "necessary" war in Afghanistan, or the millions of refugees fleeing the US-invoked escalation in Pakistan.

As President George Bush often did, Obama affirmed that it is only a violent minority that besmirches the name of a vast and "peaceful" Muslim majority. But he seemed once again to implicate all Muslims as suspect when he warned, "The sooner the extremists are isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the sooner we will all be safer."

Nowhere were these blindspots more apparent than his statements about Palestine/Israel. He gave his audience a detailed lesson on the Holocaust and explicitly used it as a justification for the creation of Israel. "It is also undeniable," the president said, "that the Palestinian people – Muslims and Christians – have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation."

Suffered in pursuit of a homeland? The pain of dislocation? They already had a homeland. They suffered from being ethnically cleansed and dispossessed of it and prevented from returning on the grounds that they are from the wrong ethno-national group. Why is that still so hard to say?

He lectured Palestinians that "resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed". He warned them that "It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered." (Note: the last suicide attack targeting civilians by a Palestinian occurred in 2004)

Fair enough, but did Obama really imagine that such words would impress an Arab public that watched in horror as Israel slaughtered 1,400 people in Gaza last winter, including hundreds of sleeping, fleeing or terrified children, with American-supplied weapons? Did he think his listeners would not remember that the number of Palestinian and Lebanese civilians targeted and killed by Israel has always far exceeded by orders of magnitude the number of Israelis killed by Arabs precisely because of the American arms he has pledged to continue giving Israel with no accountability. Amnesty International recently confirmed what Palestinians long knew: Israel broke the negotiated ceasefire when it attacked Gaza last November 4, prompting retaliatory rockets that killed no Israelis until after Israel launched its much bigger attack on Gaza. That he continues to remain silent about what happened in Gaza, and refuses to hold Israel accountable demonstrates anything but a commitment to full truth-telling.

Some people are prepared to give Obama a pass for all this because he is at last talking tough on Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank. In Cairo, he said: "The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop."

These carefully chosen words focus only on continued construction, not on the existence of the settlements themselves; they are entirely compatible with the peace process industry consensus that existing settlements will remain where they are for ever. This raises the question of where Obama thinks he is going. He summarised Palestinians' "legitimate aspirations" as being the establishment of a "state". This has become a convenient slogan to that is supposed to replace for Palestinians their pursuit of rights and justice that the proposed state actually denies. Obama is already on record opposing Palestinian refugees' right to return home, and has never supported the right of Palestinian citizens of Israel to live free from racist and religious incitement, persecution and practices fanned by Israel's highest office holders and written into its laws.

He may have more determination than his predecessor but he remains committed to an unworkable two-state "vision" aimed not at restoring Palestinian rights, but preserving Israel as an enclave of Israeli Jewish privilege. It is a dead end.

There was one sentence in his speech I cheered for and which he should heed: "Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail."

-###-

Ali Abunimah is co-founder of The Electronic Intifada

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jun/04/barack-obama-middleeast

Via: http://jnoubiyeh.blogspot.com/2009/06/bush-in-sheeps-clothing.html

No feedback yet

Voices

Voices

  • Chris Spencer The political astroturf of the United States has been fractured by figures described as "saviors." The political careers of Barack Obama and Kamala Harris epitomize that trend in clay-feet "gods" and "goddesses." Both have cultivated…
  • Most of the world of Arabs for some four centuries consisted of provinces under the Ottoman Empire (Sultanate). by Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirović  The world of Arabs (the WoA), as a distinctive part of the globe, is of extreme significance for both global…
  • by Tracy Turner The Looming Crisis: Oil Addiction and Agricultural Collapse Threaten Global Food Security By 2054: Expected global oil depletion. 2007-2017: Olive biodiesel could have mitigated crises caused by reliance on fossil fuels. Estimated…
  • 41,909 bodies counted, 10,000 missing, death count higher than 51,909 David Swanson, World BEYOND War We generally accept that if you do a census and only count the people who answer their doors you miss some people, and that you can calculate an…
  • Kamala Harris represents a militant, in-your-face feminism... Cathy Smith Kamala Harris is an intensely divisive figure in contemporary politics—an incandescent icon for some, an ongoing disappointment for many others. As the first-ever woman Vice…
  • A geopolitical issue of South-East Europe became of very importance for scholars, policymakers, and researchers with the question of the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire as one of the most crucial features of the beginning of the 20th century in…
  • Paul Craig Roberts Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, and Democrat Law School Deans Say Free Speech Threatens Their Agendas. Democrats are no longer the party of John F. Kennedy. They and their media whores are the party of Joseph Goebbels, Reich Minister of…
  • by Chris Spencer "In a landscape where many are silenced, the growing discontent of white men reveals an urgent cultural injury—a plea for recognition that, if ignored, could set off a destructive wave of division." The one thing that most white men in…
  • How the Democrats and Their Media Will Start a Civil War In order to explain how this situation occurred in America I will talk a little about a personal experience I have with my neighbor. I don't have to worry about him ever seeing this article…
  • Paul Craig Roberts Except for the neoconservatives whose agenda it is, I sometimes wonder if I am the only other person who understands what the Ukraine conflict is about. While we await Washington’s decision about firing missiles into Russia, I will…
November 2024
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 << <   > >>
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

  XML Feeds

powered by b2evolution free blog software
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted articles and information about environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. This news and information is displayed without profit for educational purposes, in accordance with, Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Thepeoplesvoice.org is a non-advocacy internet web site, edited by non-affiliated U.S. citizens. editor
ozlu Sozler GereksizGercek Hava Durumu Firma Rehberi Hava Durumu Firma Rehberi E-okul Veli Firma Rehberi