Obama’s Muslim Speech

By MADELEINE K. ALBRIGHT

On Thursday, President Obama will deliver a speech on American foreign policy to a predominantly Muslim audience in Egypt. Aside from fulfilling a campaign pledge, why has the president decided to give such a speech? When he approaches the microphone, what are the key issues he should address?

I have attended a number of conferences designed to promote understanding between the United States and people who live in Muslim-majority states. According to Muslim speakers at such events, one fact stands out: When the cold war ended, America needed an enemy to replace Communism and chose Islam.

How else, they ask, to explain the two Gulf wars, Afghanistan, Guantánamo and the plight of the Palestinians? To support their thesis, they cite the bellicose post-9/11 rhetoric of U.S. officials, the Western media’s preoccupation with Muslim extremists and the plethora of pundits who have identified Islam, especially “political Islam,” as the leading threat to civilization in the 21st century.

To most Americans, the idea that our country is attacking Islam or that we view the Islamic faith as an enemy is absurd. The first Gulf War was a response to Saddam Hussein’s invasion of a neighboring Arab country. On 9/11, America was the victim, not the aggressor. In Iraq, President Bush’s rationale for regime change, though misguided, was hardly anti-Islamic. U.S. leaders can’t be held accountable for what some writers say in order to scare people and sell books. What is more, in the 1990s, America twice led NATO into conflicts on behalf of Muslim populations — first in Bosnia, then Kosovo.

Nevertheless, the perception that America is hostile to Islam remains widespread, much to the satisfaction of Al Qaeda, the Taliban and the government of Iran. To his credit, President Bush attempted on several occasions to communicate his respect and peaceful intentions to Muslim audiences. Sadly, those efforts fell on deaf ears.

On Thursday, President Obama can be assured of a wide audience, and he will speak with a far cleaner slate than his predecessor. Mr. Obama has a family connection to Islam; he also has a well deserved reputation for weaving moral and political themes together in a coherent and thoughtful way. His challenge — not unusual for this president — will be to fulfill the expectations he has raised.

Mr. Obama’s dilemma is that no speech, however eloquent, can disentangle U.S.-Muslim relations from the treacherous terrain of current events in places such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran and the Middle East.

Since the president is unlikely to announce major policy changes, he must persuade Muslims abroad to view our existing policies in a new light. That is no small job. It requires separating the rationale for contemporary actions from the long history of clashes between Islam and the West, and it requires overcoming the resentment caused when Muslim noncombatants are killed as a byproduct of conflict.

The more direct the president is in acknowledging these problems, the more likely it is that Muslims will think objectively about his words.

Muslims desire respect and respect demands frankness. We cannot pretend that American soldiers and aircraft are not attacking Muslims. We can, however, remind the world that the people we oppose are murdering Muslims and other innocents every day. In Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, our allies are Muslims. We have partners in Lebanon and among Palestinians, as well.

We understand the desire of every country to be free from foreign domination. We will be neither intimidated nor dissuaded from our purpose, but our goal isn’t to wage war; it is to help establish security for local populations and our fondest hope is to return home as soon as possible.

Although the president will be speaking to a Muslim audience about American policy, it is equally important that he address the audience in the United States. Muslims abroad need to embrace a more accurate picture of America; but Americans need to learn more about Muslims. It cannot be said too often that Islam is a religion of peace, that terrorism is as indefensible in Islam as it is in the other two Abrahamic faiths, and that the vast majority of Muslims — including the millions who are citizens of the United States — want to live in dignity and without violence.

Finally, President Obama can remind his Egyptian hosts that repression in the name of moderation is still repression. Despite the mistakes of recent years, support for democracy should remain a central theme of U.S. foreign policy. Armed groups, such as Hamas, have no place in an election. But democracy is why women have led governments in four of the five most populous Muslim-majority states and why women were recently elected to the parliament of Kuwait.

January’s provincial balloting in Iraq has helped to unify the country, while legislative debate has provided a peaceful outlet for anger. Upcoming votes in Iran and Afghanistan will no doubt influence the course of those nations. Democracy’s advantage is that it contains the means for its own correction through public accountability and discussion. It also offers a non-violent alternative for the forces of change, whether those forces are progressive or conservative.

It would be unreasonable to expect too much of any speech, especially on a topic as prone to subjective interpretation as U.S. foreign policy and Islam. Given President Obama’s record, however, we can be confident that a brave and possibly historic effort is in store.

Madeleine K. Albright was the U.S. secretary of state from 1997 to 2001.
Source