"Unclench your fist"

Tue, 01/20/2009 - 12:53pm

According to a very scientific poll of the FP lunch table, this was the highight:

To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect.  To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West - know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy.  To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist. 

Joshua Keating | Permalink | | Comments? Login or register
( filed under: )


Advertisement

 

Business as Usual

by Sam on Tue, 01/20/2009 - 1:14pm

What's special about it? He is telling them to take the first step. Previous presidents used to say that too. Also this is what those countries say to America too. North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, Cuba,... they ask US to take the first step. This is exactly business as usual. What where you guys having for lunch? lol

A bone on the lunch table

by Don Bacon on Tue, 01/20/2009 - 3:57pm

A principal bone of contention in the Muslim world, against the US, is the US military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan.

From Pew Research, Dec 18, 2008: "In Muslim nations, the wars in Afghanistan and particularly Iraq have driven negative ratings nearly off the charts." While Obama intends to scale back (not completely withdraw) in Iraq, he will double the US destructive military effort in Afghanistan.

So words are pleasant, but Bush said nice things too when he started.

the most immediate bone,

by papicek on Tue, 01/20/2009 - 9:22pm

but I think not the principle bone of contention. The West itself has for almost a century been the determiner of economic and political reality in the Middle East and South Asia. Whether it was the placement of borders after WWI, our support of repressive regimes, our support of an Israel that is taken as repressive, the attempt to retake the Suez Canal, the one-sided oil contracts (or the fact that the major oil exchanges today exist in London and New York), Operation Ajax, the first Gulf War, the second Gulf War, and anything at all that today restricts the full flowering of an Islamic polity, are all grievances held against the West as a whole.

But who is the target? The region has politics of its own as well. Does the recent Iranian diplomatic offensive on Hamas' behalf have more to do with Iran's anti-Israel, anti-Western policy or more to do the Saudi-Iranian shadow war and positioning the only country ruled by traditional Islamic jurists as the pre-eminent champion of a modern Islamic resurgence? I'll bet it depends on who you talk to in Tehran.

My perspective is, were we to evacuate our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan tomorrow, we might be able to think about establishing limited dialogues about some of this. Even then, I'd expect the ancient political chaos in the region to be the real determiner of what happens (or doesn't) in the next few decades. That's the dynamic of the region and there's almost nothing Obama/Clinton can do about it. Certainly the political will to begin the attempt does not yet exist in the US. Even being seen to think about attempting a serious dialogue with entities like Hamas could sabotage Obama's entire agenda. Therefore I wouldn't expect anything substantive out of State until the last half of Obama's, if there is one, second term.

I hear you

by Don Bacon on Tue, 01/20/2009 - 11:29pm

but I'll still go with Pew Research. One-sided contracts are one thing but killing large numbers of people really gets their attention, and who can blame them. Now it looks like escalation of violence in Afghanistan, and who knows about the spillover into Pakistan which has already started.

These people wrongly "blame their society's ills on the West", according to Obama, as he advocates more western military in Afghanistan and NATO strikes against Pakistan.

So I don't expect much out of Obama either, based on what he's said. People say that things just can't get worse than they are. Sure. The new crowd seems more interventionist than the previous one, and they're certainly closer to Israel. Hold on tight, this could be quite a ride.

Obama slams Israel for destroying Gaza

by Don Bacon on Tue, 01/20/2009 - 5:40pm

Obama heretofore has been silent on Gaza but we know what he meant by this: "To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict. . . know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy."

Joshua -- I agree, that was

by Fern on Tue, 01/20/2009 - 8:18pm

Joshua -- I agree, that was the best line from an otherwise uninspiring speech. I disagree with some of the commenters who think Obama's approach as outlined in his inauguration speech indicated "business as usual." Our previous foreign policy posture was not "Hey, we want to be friends, so please stop acting like a bully so that we can invite you over for dinner." It was more like, "You're evil, do all the things we say or we'll crush you."

Don Bacon -- I think you've fallen off your rocker if you think that line was a reference to Israel and Gaza.

Okay . . .

by Don Bacon on Tue, 01/20/2009 - 11:15pm

. . .so it was wishful thinking, the audacity of hope, you might say.

Direct reference to Israelis & Arabs, I'd argue.

by Kordo on Tue, 01/20/2009 - 9:14pm

I think the section of the speech Joshua quoted, and the line Don mentioned, both bear directly on recent events in the Middle East. I wouldn't characterize it as a "slam" on Israel; I see it as a very direct & impartial heads-up to both sides of the I/P conflict that their behavior needs to change. Both sides have had eight years of rollicking through an old-school bottle drunk. Hangovers hurt, but they have a way of bringing you back to reality. IMHO, the sober assessment of reality in that region is vital, for them as well as for the US.