Obama’s Speech in Egypt: Muslims are Speechless

By Zakaria Farah Monday, June 01, 2009   President Barrack Hussein Obama will this week give his long-awaited and over-publicized speech to the Muslim world in Cairo, Egypt. This is a break from the macho attitude and the cowboy politics of his predecessor, George W. Bush, who rarely uttered the words "Muslim", "Islam" or "Islamic" in a sentence without the word "terror", "terrorists", "radicals" or "extremists". During the Bush years, which entirely coincided with the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks, Muslims lived under constant fear of intimidation, arrests, and false charges.   In fact, in the last several years, Muslims, especially in America came under attack both literally and metaphorically. They were subjected to all kinds of discrimination from mainstream institutions while the right-wing groups slandered them unabatedly.   So it should be with great relief and appreciation that the Obama administration is giving political overtures to the Muslims both within America and abroad. Those overtures which were promised to the American people during the campaign included but not limited to the ending of the unpopular Iraq War, the closure of the notorious Guantanamo Bayprison, and the ending of the illegal and immoral torture of terrorism suspects.   Instead, Muslims while still respectful and trustful of the new president, are suspicious and apprehensive of U.S policies in the Muslim world, especially in the Middle East. This suspicion was exacerbated when President Obama chose Egypt as a venue to address the Muslim world. The White House claims that the message is more important than the venue. I disagree. This gesture was wrongheaded in many ways. First of all, Egypt is not a country that could be an example to the rest of the Muslim or Arab nations. Egypt has been ruled by a despotic leader for nearly three decades and it does not practice any form of democracy, or allow freedom of speech. It has used brutal tactics to suppress political dissent and killed or jailed hundreds of political prisoners. Most notably the members of the Muslim Brotherhood, the political and insurgency movement were brutally and harshly subdued.   In 2005, Hosni Mubarak and his cronies jailed Dr. Ayman Nour a parliamentarian who challenged him in the elections of that year. As expected, Mubarak "won" the keys to presidential palace, while Dr. Nour was sent to prison. The Bush administration at that time knew that Dr. Ayman Nour was falsely accused and was imprisoned for challenging the tyrannical rule of Hosni Mubarak. Instead of sanctioning Mubarak and his government, the Bush administration released this weak statement,   "The United States is deeply troubled by the conviction today of Egyptian politician Ayman Nour by an Egyptian court. The conviction of Dr. Nour, the runner-up in Egypt's 2005 presidential elections, calls into question Egypt's commitment to democracy, freedom and the rule of law. We are also disturbed by reports that Mr. Nour's health has seriously declined due to the hunger strike on which he has embarked in protest of the conditions of his trial and detention. The United States calls upon the Egyptian government to act under the laws of Egypt in the spirit of its professed desire for increased political openness and dialogue within Egyptian society, and out of humanitarian concern, to release Mr. Nour from detention." It is foolish to suggest that Egypt was ever committed "to democracy, freedom and the rule of law". Of course, if someone is tortured, their health will deteriorate with or without hunger strike. The Egyptian government is already acting under the laws of Egypt, because in Egyptthere is apparently no law against mock trial and the practice of torture in prison. Egyptian authorities have neither professed nor desired political openness.   The fact that Mr. Obama is giving a speech in a country that does not practice what America preaches is a hypocritical move that sends the wrong message to all concerned. The dictators will see this move as a green light to do whatever they please, and for the Muslim population everywhere this signals thatAmerica only pays lip service to freedom and democracy in the Muslim world. In his coming speech, Obama would almost certainly wow his listeners, both admirers and critics alike. In Obama's administration, pompous rhetoric is not in short supply. He would most likely emphasize words like "United States is not at war with Islam" or "Islam is a great religion practiced by many millions of law-abiding individuals around the world" or "A few fringe groups are trying to hijack the tolerant message of Islam". He would also likely stress the importance of the Arab world to come at peace or with peace to the existence of Israel. He may also pay token reference to the need for democracy and prosperity in the Muslim world.   The president, however, should discard these predictable themes and instead deal forthrightly with the ills and predicaments that handicap the Muslim world. For one thing, Mr. Obama should tell his host and other Arab leaders that democratic freedoms such as free and fair elections and freedom of assembly and of speech is not something exclusive to Western citizens. He should state that, "If our citizens can choose whoever they want to lead them, so can your citizens". No doubt, those who benefit from the status quo would readily say that "democracy" is a Western concept. But isn't the concept of "freedom" a universal concept?   The president should also tell his audience that, "if United States can discontinue torture, so can you". He should tell these leaders and anyone who is willing to listen, that torture is not only immoral and inhumane, it also illegal under international law and counter-productive as a political or law-enforcement tool. For many years, the Bush administration unashamedly sent prisoners to other countries such asEgypt and Jordan for torture. While it is commendable that Obama stopped the so-called "extra-ordinary rendition", the practice of outsourcing torture, he should tell his hosts that the little Guantanamos within their countries should be closed.   The president should also tell his Muslim audience worldwide that when Muslims participate in elections, there decisions will be respected in the West. Muslims should freely choose their leaders whether they are "fundamentalists' or "secularists". If the Western powers can overturn elections in Muslim and Arab countries, then the Muslims can never be "free". Two examples where elections were overturned by the West are the cases of Algeria and Palestine. In 1992, in an open and fair election inAlgeria, the winner was an Islamic party.  The West considered this as an anomaly, because the Islamic party was too "fundamentalist" to their taste. What ensued were a brutal civil war and the massacre of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians for participating in political Islam. In 2006, in an almost identical situation, Hamas won the election in the Palestinian Territories. Almost immediately, Israel and its Western allies imposed sanctions on Palestine simply because an unwanted party won the elections. If Obama is serious about dialogue between Muslims and the West then he should break with the past and respect fair and free elections in Muslim and Arab countries no matter who wins or which party prevails.   Finally, while I do not expect Obama to address the issue of Somalia in the coming speech, he should immediately take an active role in the resolution of the Somali conflict. Three U.S presidents have come and gone while Somalia was burning. Those presidents have blundered several opportunities to resolve the Somali conflict once and for all. In fact, past U.S policies in Somalia were a complete disaster. The U.S has not seriously considered playing a constructive role in Somalia. As the only superpower and the world's largest economy, the U.S can and should try to solve the Somali problem. While I do not recommend or expect the Obama administration to get involved in Somalia militarily, it should support the fledgling government financially and diplomatically without hesitation. His administration should also re-emphasize and reinforce a one Somalia policy in order to prevent and discourage the dismembering of Somalia into micro-states.   All in all, many Muslims will not judge Obama by his words but by his deeds. If during his term or terms there are free and fair elections in many Muslim and Arab countries, and there is an independent Palestine next to Israel, then history, or at least Muslims, will judge Obama as America's greatest president. Zakaria Farah zacfarah@yahoo.co.uk