Dear critters,

I wonder if the discourse of Obama is a suitable topic of discussion
on our list?

The full text can be found on:
http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/06/a_new_beginning.php

My own understanding is that there exists no single, ultimate,
definition of 'Islam', 'America', 'Israel' or 'Obama'. In this
discourse, Obama portrays himself, America, Islam and Israel in a way
that both makes peace possible and that is reasonably recognisable by
all participants.

Many Arabs, Jews and Americans will clench their teeth because Obama
tries to articulate painful facts after more than half a Century of
hypocritical wishful thinking. Each side will find his words
incomplete and they will be right. He does not say the whole truth
(can a single person say it?) and his words need to be followed by
concrete actions. And yet it was felt, in the Arabic World at least,
that his discourse could be one of the most important political
speeches since the discourses of Kennedy in 1961 and Marshall in 1947.

I see Obama's action as a necessary and insufficient condition for
greater peace in the Muslim world. I just hope he does not meet the
same fate as other pacifists such as Gandhi, Hariri, Jaures and, of
course, Kennedy.

A few cursory on-the-spot comments on Obama’s text:
In point 1, he gives a picture of America that contrasts sharply both
with the discourse of Ben Laden and with the image convened by the
Bush administration. He insists on the presence of 7 million Muslims
in the USA who enjoy higher than average education and income.
Understandably, he does not and cannot mention the huge inequalities
that separate the rich and the poor in his own country. He also
displays some personal understanding of Islamic religion and culture,
probably enough to be more credible than any of his predecessors.

On point 2 on Israel & Palestine. He mentions the horrors faced by
both people, including Palestinian refugee camps, though he does not
venture on the question of the right of return of Palestinian refugees
or on Hamas’s apparent powerlessness to control suicide bombings. A
key problem that he does not address is the possibility that both
Israeli and Palestinian rulers have a vested interest in maintaining a
state of war which ensures their continuous re-election.

In his point 3, he reaffirms America's commitment to foster a world in
which no nation holds nuclear weapons while staying quite elusive as
to how this can be achieved. He is more explicit, however, regarding
the unacceptability of Iran’s creating nuclear bombs. Notably enough,
he breaks with the Bush demonisation of Iran and describes America's
1978 coup d'Etat as 'the over-throw of a democratically elected
government'.

In point 4, he addresses the question of democracy which he defines as
'governments that reflect the will of the people.' He covertly
criticises the war in Irak and reaffirms that 'Each nation gives life
to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its
own people.' By saying so, he also restricts his authority on this
matter to that of advice and exemplary action. I am still unclear as
to whether this is the alpha and the omega of what a democratic nation
can do for their undemocratic neighbours? Perhaps so...

Point 5 on religious freedom is telling. Obama mentions the Islam of
Andalusia that existed 800 years ago. This is both tragic and astute.
Tragic because it hints that, since then, Islamic countries have shown
little tolerance to other religions: how many churches, synagogues and
Buddhist temples in Muslim countries? How many (ex)Muslims allowed to
chose their religious beliefs? It is astute because by mentioning
Cordoba in parallel with the efforts of America, he puts some gentle
pressure on Muslim governments and populations to accept other
religions. The French will also feel the little slap on the wrist...

Point 6 on women's rights follows the same discursive strategy: Obama
(cherry) picks examples of female achievements in Muslim countries to
show that Islam is open to sexual equality. The key and most
contentious passage is probably that: "I do not believe that women
must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect
those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But
it should be their choice."

The last point on economic development seems to be a 'figure imposee'
of American president speeches. Obama suggests an American cooperation
that goes beyond oil to embrace knowledge-based industries. It is
difficult to measure how much of this is empty rhetorics though.
Obviously, he is not going to mention the systems of commissions and
retro-commissions through which governments from all sides have
accumulated petro-dollars over the past 60 years. One foreseeable
development, however, is that the USA will purport to influence the
training of Arabic elites in the coming decades.

One last comment: I wonder how other countries and organizations
(including businesses) will respond.

Thoughts? Reactions? Rectifications?

 Ismael


-- 
Dr Ismael Al-Amoudi
Lecturer in organisation studies, Henley business school, University of Reading
Research Associate of Holywell Manor, Balliol College, University of Oxford
Oxford Seminar on Conventions and Rules (OSCAR) http://oxfordseminar.org