The Speech

The text, with comments:

...We meet at a time of tension between the United States and Muslims around the world - tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond any current policy debate. The relationship between Islam and the West includes centuries of co-existence and cooperation, but also conflict and religious wars. More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations. Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam.

Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims. The attacks of September 11th, 2001 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights. This has bred more fear and mistrust.

So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end...

This is our President at his best. He thoughtfully describes the contours of a complicated issue in a way that most observers would recognize as mostly fair and comprehensive.

The "mostly" modifier is due to the claim of centuries of co-existence. The claim is no doubt simply true (bloody co-existence is still co-existence). However, "co-existence" may be meant to bring to mind "peaceful co-existence", which, so far as I can tell, is historical fiction.

I do so recognizing that change cannot happen overnight. No single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have all the complex questions that brought us to this point...

This is our President at his not-so best. As if, if only given more time and speeches, he could eradicate years of mistrust and answer all the relevant complex questions.

Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith.

Pettily: It is easy to suspect that the "I am a Christian", was a late, political, addition.

As a student of history, I also know civilization's debt to Islam. It was Islam - at places like Al-Azhar University - that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality...

It is a simple fact of political life, that a speaker cannot mention Islam without acknowledging the great achievements of Muslims (mostly) centuries ago. What makes this not entirely harmless is that most such lists -- including this -- are composed of the achievements produced via the interaction of many cultures -- including Ancient Mediterranean, Chinese and Indian.

So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn't. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear

But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words - within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: E pluribus unum: "Out of many, one."

Much has been made of the fact that an African-American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected President. But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores - that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average...

It is easy to quibble with the silly claim that part of the responsibility of the PotUS is to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam, but he what he asks for in return is more valuable then what he offers.

The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America's goals, and our need to work together. Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al Qaeda and the Taliban with broad international support. We did not go by choice, we went because of necessity. I am aware that some question or justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet Al Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with...

Volumes are spoken, I think, by the fact that the President, and his advisors, felt it necessary to acknowledge those who question or justify the attacks of 9/11 and to defend the proposition that they were not right.

We also know that military power alone is not going to solve the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is why we plan to invest $1.5 billion each year over the next five years to partner with Pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who have been displaced. And that is why we are providing more than $2.8 billion to help Afghans develop their economy and deliver services that people depend upon...

One fact to be dealt with that the President ought to have recognized from the financial bailouts: When you start handing out money, people start lining up to get their cut. There are people in Egypt who are, no doubt, wondering who they have to kill to get their share of the "not-by-military-power-alone" fund.

The sooner the extremists are isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the sooner we will all be safer...

Perhaps the most interesting sub-texts of the speech, to me, is the "or else" always hanging overhead, every now and then poking its nose. In this case (implicitly): Muslims will not be safer until extremists are unwelcome in Muslim communities.

Those who judge the new President as soft on terror ought consider: Obama has sort of painted himself in a corner -- by undoing policies the previous administration considered necessary to keep us safe and by groveling before those who generally wish us no good -- where he will have little choice but to over-react if there is another 9/11 style terrorist attack, with many of those who hamstrung the previous administration's aggression, likely cheer-leading.

The second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world.

America's strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied.

Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed - more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. Denying that fact is baseless, ignorant, and hateful. Threatening Israel with destruction - or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews - is deeply wrong, and only serves to evoke in the minds of Israelis this most painful of memories while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve...

This sort of narrative is for the benefit of American Jewish voters, not Muslims. Muslims, as I think the President well knows, readily dismiss the narrative with the on-the-surface-sensible argument "why should Palestinians suffer for the crimes of Europe?"

If the President wanted to argue for the Jewish Homeland to Muslims, he would have both identified Israel as the ancestral and spiritual homeland of the Jewish people and, gently, reminded them that anti-semitism was not a purely European phenomena. The Spanish Jewish/Muslim "Golden Age" ended, violently, a long/long time ago (Jews, for example Maimonadies' family, were forced from Muslim Spain centuries before they were forced from Christian Spain). In the almost thousand years since then the treatment of Jews (and other minorities) in Muslim lands is not characterized by tolerance (a point he does make later in the speech to further a different argument). Since "what we share is more important then what divides us" is a great theme of this speech, it would have been appropriate to note that a history of violent anti-semitism is something Christians and Muslims share.

More Directly to the point: Israel is more a product of Muslim, than Christian, anti-semitism. A majority of Israeli Jews are the descendants of refugees from Muslim, not European, countries. Historically, early Zionism was divided between "cultural" -- who wanted only to build Jewish communities, but not a Jewish state, in our ancestral homeland -- and "political" -- who wanted to build a Jewish state -- branches. After the recurring Arab massacres of Jews in the early years of peaceful Jewish settlement, it became clear that growing Jewish communities in the Holy Land was not possible without a state to protect them. Even today, in the end, the ultimate necessity for the preservation of Jewish State (as opposed to an "Israelstine"), for the many Israelis who no longer identify themselves much as Zionists, is simply that, for good reason, nobody believes that Jews would be treated justly in a majority Arab state.

At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. 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.

I have already discussed the red herring that the settlement "issue" is. The only things I have to add are that (a) I am not sure if/when any Israeli leader agreed to halt "natural growth" (if that is what Obama is referring to) and (b) [WARNING: CHEAP SHOT AHEAD] that given his personal background, perhaps Obama's choice of phrase, questioning the legitimacy of the settlements was intended as a statement of solidarity!

Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can live, and work, and develop their society. And just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel's security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress...

The implication here is that the Israelis do not recognize the need to improve the economic situation in the Palestinian territories. The reality, of course, is that Bibi has, since his election, prioritized that need above all else. This misrepresentation by Obama is an odd strategy if bringing Israelis and Palestinians together in peace is his goal.

The Talmud, describes Aaron, the paradigmatic Peace-Maker, as "tricking" opposing parties into believing that their rival's intentions were less malign then they, in truth, were. Obama, if peace is his goal, apparently believes the opposite move is the play.

America will align our policies with those who pursue peace, and say in public what we say in private to Israelis and Palestinians and Arabs. We cannot impose peace. But privately, many Muslims recognize that Israel will not go away. Likewise, many Israelis recognize the need for a Palestinian state. It is time for us to act on what everyone knows to be true...

Obama here continues his anti-Aaron strategy. The reality is, of course, more than "many Israelis recognize the need for a Palestinian state": The democratically elected government of Israel led, then, by Ehud Barack, accepted one. Further, an important point conscience-ly obscured by Obama's language: While some Israelis who "recognize the need for a Palestinian state" do so on pragmatic grounds, many recognize the moral need. The same language implicitly acknowledges that Muslims, even privately, generally refuse to recognize any moral need for the Jewish Homeland. At best, "many" "recognize" that Israel will not go away. Many others, of course -- the Government of Iran, for example -- have no such recognition.

It worth noting, by contrast, the "Aaron Strategy" is employed vis-a-vis the Israelis. On the basis of scanty, at best, evidence, and in the face of substantive evidence to the contrary, it is repeatedly asserted from near every quarter that Palestinians generally wish to live in peace with the Jewish State. I have a hard time understanding, then, why the President, and his advisors, thought it wise to describe Israeli intentions to Muslims as being more malign than they, in truth, are.

This mis-reflection may simply be the product of a President without clear understanding of the terrain himself, who is surrounded, on the ground, by an army of "progressive" staffers with deep abiding hostility towards the Jewish State. At the very least, it serves to strengthen the fear that the Administrations aim is not so much to bring true peace, as to win Muslim favor by "selling out" Israelis.

For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is indeed a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically-elected Iranian government...

The implicit characterization of Mosadeqq as a democrat is revolting on so many levels, but is, perhaps, a necessary part of the approach/argument the President is taking/making.

This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only when they are out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. No matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy...

This is a particularly well-crafted argument by the President. The danger of Muslim-Democracy has always been that the Muslim Brotherhoods or Hamases always threaten to win elections. The President well-used his bully pulpit here.

All these things must be done in partnership. Americans are ready to join with citizens and governments; community organizations, religious leaders, and businesses in Muslim communities around the world to help our people pursue a better life.

The issues that I have described will not be easy to address. But we have a responsibility to join together on behalf of the world we seek - a world where extremists no longer threaten our people, and American troops have come home; a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own, and nuclear energy is used for peaceful purposes; a world where governments serve their citizens, and the rights of all God's children are respected. Those are mutual interests. That is the world we seek. But we can only achieve it together.

I know there are many - Muslim and non-Muslim - who question whether we can forge this new beginning. Some are eager to stoke the flames of division, and to stand in the way of progress. Some suggest that it isn't worth the effort - that we are fated to disagree, and civilizations are doomed to clash. Many more are simply skeptical that real change can occur. There is so much fear, so much mistrust. But if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward. And I want to particularly say this to young people of every faith, in every country - you, more than anyone, have the ability to remake this world.

All of us share this world for but a brief moment in time. The question is whether we spend that time focused on what pushes us apart, or whether we commit ourselves to an effort - a sustained effort - to find common ground, to focus on the future we seek for our children, and to respect the dignity of all human beings.

It is easier to start wars than to end them. It is easier to blame others than to look inward; to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There is also one rule that lies at the heart of every religion - that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. This truth transcends nations and peoples - a belief that isn't new; that isn't black or white or brown; that isn't Christian, or Muslim or Jew. It's a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the heart of billions. It's a faith in other people, and it's what brought me here today.

We have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the courage to make a new beginning, keeping in mind what has been written.

The Holy Koran tells us, "O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another."

The Talmud tells us: "The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of promoting peace."

The Holy Bible tells us, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God."

The people of the world can live together in peace. We know that is God's vision. Now, that must be our work here on Earth. Thank you. And may God's peace be upon you.

This final flourish is, simply, spectacular.

There is a certain danger in all this, however. Hypocrisy is, in Islam, a big deal. Muslims will likely be very sensitive -- in a way that Americans have thus far not been -- to the perception that Obama's actions do not match his words.