Obama’s New “Muslim Country” Diplomacy
Barack Obama will travel to Egypt next month to deliver a long-anticipated speech about America’s relations with the Muslim world.
”President Obama will deliver his long-promised speech to the Muslim world in Egypt next month”, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs declared. It does make one wonder what Obama sees as the role of the United States in the 21st century. Will the secular U.S. government give de facto recognition to a global “Islamic State” that supersedes our relationship with the secular governments of these countries? Will he stop on the way back in Rome to discuss U.S. relations with Catholic countries and go on to London to discuss U.S. Anglican relations?
What could a U.S. President possibly say beyond the fact that we respect all religions and we believe that every individual should be free to practice whatever religion they choose. Further, we believe that no person should be treated as a second-class citizen because they belong to a minority religious group. Our freedom of religion philosophy probably will not go over well in the Muslim and Arab world where a single religion, Islam, dominates all facets of life, economics and politics.
A religious Islamic party now rules even the most secular Muslim country, Turkey. More complex still, how do we hide our utter horror at the thought that in many Muslin countries there is a growing threat that Sharia law will be imposed on the entire population?
I can imagine the difficulty the Obama staff will have in drafting such a speech. Let’s look over the shoulders of the Obama speechwriters see what they are drafting and thinking:
“Islam is an ancient and peaceful religion,” President Obama will say with all the sincerity and oratorical flourish he can feign. Disregarding for a moment the sanitized version of history, Islam is unique among religions in that it was founded by a ruthless illiterate warrior, Mohammad, who used assassination to advance his cause, was responsible for massacres, evicted or enslaved non-believers, engaged in forcible conversion and led by his own account a hedonistic life.
Mohammad left behind a supremacist legacy in which non-believers should only be tolerated if they pay a tax in acknowledgement of Muslin superiority and remain in a state of subservience. While secular Muslims try to distance themselves from this heritage they are reminded on a daily basis by their more devout co-religionists that Jihad is their sacred obligation. Can moderate Muslins completely ignore the more belligerent rants of the Koran?
Will there ever be an Islamic enlightenment and secularization of government? In the current environment it is far more likely that a fatwa demanding the assassination of a Muslim Rousseau, Voltaire or Locke would be issued at the first sign of such blasphemy. On a more practical note will there ever be Muslin secularists, like Garibaldi, Mazzini and Cavour to go to war with the Pope and strip him of his temporal power?
“America has always had the greatest respect for the peaceful Muslim world,” he will say with only a subtle trace of sarcasm on his face. Of course, the truth is American-Muslim relations were born in antipathy. In early 1786, Thomas Jefferson, then minister to France, and John Adams, then minister to Britain, met in London with the resident Tripolitan ambassador, Abdrahaman, to try and negotiate a peace treaty to protect American shipping from the “Barbary Pirate” regimes of Algiers, Tripoli, Tunis and Morocco. In the process, the future American presidents asked the ambassador why his nation was hostile to the new American republic even though America had done nothing to provoke or offend his country. The ambassador answered as Thomas Jefferson reported in a letter to Foreign Secretary John Jay and Congress on March 28, 1786:
“That it was founded on the Laws of their prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”
Jefferson, the pacifist, and the first Secretary of State, seems to be the only high ranking official of the Washington Administration incensed over the actions of the Barbary Pirates. And, in December of 1790, he sent Congress his “Proposal to Use Force against the Barbary States.” When Jefferson, a man with a long memory, finally assumed the Presidency in March, of 1801, the treaties negotiated with previous administrations were unraveling. Tripoli had issued an ultimatum … if it did not receive a new warship and a new treaty committing the United States to annual tribute, war would be declared within six months.
On May 15, 1801, three months after taking office, the Jefferson cabinet met, and without seeking authorization from Congress, sanctioned the use of force against the Barbary States. Over the next four years, the Barbary Coast was effectively pacified by what President Jefferson euphemistically called, a continuous “cruise.”
“We do not condemn all Muslims for the acts of a few,” he will boldly say with an air of authority. The fact that millions on the “Arab Street” cheer every despicable act of
al Qaeda presumably must be erased from our collective memory. We should not remind ourselves that without the tacit support of the “Arab Street” al Qaeda would not exist. Should we try to delude ourselves into believing that 9/11 was an accident of history and the throngs of Arab-Muslims did not roar at the exploits of Osama bin Laden?
“Our quarrel is not with Islam but only with a small number extremists that distort the religion for their own ideological purposes” President Obama will say with mellifluous verbal skill. This sort of rhetoric begs the question. Jihad is a traditional Muslim obligation, superiority and the right to rule non-believers is a core teaching of the Prophet, and the inferior status of women is central to the Islamic moral order. Political correctness be dammed, we have a problem.
“Muslims have made great contributions to our civil society” he will say with sincerity dripping from his golden vocal cords while Hilary’s eyes role in her head. How do we have a civil discussion with a society that treats women as chattel and in its more extreme iterations denies them a basic education? What is it that President Obama will say - Oh it’s all right if you stone women who don’t cover their heads in public? Maybe, it’s better not to raise the subject of women’s’ rights.
“Poverty, lack of education and economic opportunity are at the heart of the problem, if we solve this extremism will dissipate” President Obama will say with messianic conviction. Poverty is rampant because of a self-inflicted lack of general education and a demographic time bomb built on a philosophy that control of the world is dependent upon profligate reproduction. Economic opportunity is denied the populace by leaders who are more concerned with placating the religious fanatics in their midst than meeting the needs of the people.
“Egypt is the birthplace of science and mathematics,” President Obama will say with awe in his voice. Of course this happened a millennia before Mohammad was born and as we all know everything has been downhill since. We could talk about the sophisticated Moorish culture in Spain - oops they weren’t Arab-Muslims they were primarily Berbers who were forcibly converted.
Maybe we shouldn’t have a relationship with any religion and stick to our more traditional diplomacy, which deals only with U.S. interests. In fact, we have nothing to say to Muslins, Catholics, Protestants, Hindus or any other religious group save - you are free to practice your religion but are not free to impose your values on any other culture or individual.
Pretty bold assuming what he will say. We’ll see if time makes you the fool or the messenger.
With that said, I agree with what you have to say about Islam. Its a dangerous religion whose tenants have been secularized to a certain extent but only so much as to bring it up to speed with other, more peaceful, religions.
Now I suppose you’ve opened a can of worms and I’ve just poured it onto a plate. Lets see how many blind comments this posting will attract.
May 17th, 2009 at 9:21 pm
Like all “great Western” faith systems, Islam is broad and nebulous enough to permit adherents to pick and choose. All of them have moved between the extremes of Roman or German absolutism and tyranny and libertarianism. At one time or another, all of them have imposed the social restricts that the current radical extremist posture that some Muslim ideologues currently demand.
Using religion as an abstract component of propaganda is a vicious tactic, whether employed by Osamaites, Hitlerites, Stalinists, or Charlie Chaplin. Jefferson, not Bush, had precisely the right tactic. Destroy the nexus of threats, and then return to your business — prepared, of course to hammer any coals that may reemerge from the hammering. This minimizes suffering on all sides, and allows for the possibility of real change.
May 18th, 2009 at 5:49 am
With all this appealing to the muslim or arab world by President Obama why does he bother when Arabs or even most muslims do not believe in abortions of their peoples or in sodomy marriages as Obama promotes in the United States of America.What he does there he will also do in other nations so it is good to take what he says Egypt and the world with a grain of salt. The real help and hope is not found in him or others but in the Lord God Almighty,The Lord Jesus Christ. He is the one who died for our sins on the cross and rose again and is alive forevermore.From the Authorized King James Holy Bible of 1611,the preserved word of God.Read John and Romans in it.www.fbn.org or http://www.pgm.org , Thank You,Sincerely; George
May 18th, 2009 at 9:14 am
The last time a Muslim country invaded Europe in the name of spreading Islam was 1683 when the Ottoman Turks attacked Vienna. If, first Britain and France and more recently the US and Israel would stop attempts to influence Miiddle East politics to their own economic and poltical advantage probably there wouldn’t be such anger at the US and the West. We have not promoted our own enlgihtenment principles in the Middle East, so how can we condemn the people of the Middle East for not adopting them. It is not as though thier anger against us sprang from nowhere or reprsents some sudden inexplicable return to the Middle Ages. Most people, whatever their religious beliefs, simply want a better life for themselves and their children. And on the subject of returning to the Middle Ages, doesn’t is seem almost incredible that we are now arguing about the use of torture as a moral option in the first decade of the 21th century?
May 18th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
While I have no great love for Islam, as it seems contrived at the very best, neither do I find great wisdom in much of the Christian churches, although I consider myself one; same for the offical religion of Israel, much of it seems, by any logical view, as Spock might say, ILLOGICAL !!! They all are full of myths, half truths, and many silly if not absurd beliefs.
The bobbing up and down by Jews to the West Wall, or by Muslims, or of Christians wearing silly clothes like Catholic Bishops [and cute red shoes for the Pope], it’s all over the top, a bit nuts! And the stronger people believe in these things the more likely they are nuts and willing to destroy anyone not like themselves! [ I do try to respect all belief's but can not ignore their weaknesses.]
I believe in God, partly because of a near-death-experience that showed me a beauty and reason beyond this often crazy dimension. But I’m afraid that the zealots of the major religions will destroy us all, they go against basic common sense and rational compromise. Jews often blame nearly everyone for the terrible things of World War 2, and seem willing to send their 100+ nuclear bombs all over the Mideast unless their view of the world is totally accepted. They will not talk to those who do not recognize Israel YET they do not effectively recognize the Arabs or Arab land, yes even if they are Christians! [not that it should matter, but more American's should know that many Arabs are not Muslims.]
Muslims too often can only think of the Israel/Mideast problem and not the bigger picture, like of million’s of Muslims living happily in the West; they too often encourage extremist’s in Islam and they do not work hard enough to see the delicate position of Israel.
And too many right wing Christians supported Bush/Cheney and their in effect holy war, which has made the Mideast all the more of a mess and our mess!
Let’s try to stick to a few common sense idea’s about religion, because the farther away from the center we move the less accurate we are, literally the farther away from God or any generally agreed view of decency, and the closer to a war that will make Iraq seem like a picnic.
May 18th, 2009 at 11:12 pm
Chuck S., there are no great ‘Western’ faith systems. The major world religions are ‘Eastern”. The bsic Islamic problem is not just the Koran, throw in the ‘dog in the manger factor’.
May 20th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Yes this sounds like what”our” president will say, he has so far apoligized for everything that this country has ever done. He has apologized because we are the strongest nation in the world, that this country has stood up to the bullies of the world,and that until he was elected a presidents job was to help guide our political course as determined by the people of this great country. Now it seems the presidents job is to kiss up to all of the dictators, terrorists and failed political ideas that are stii managing to hang on. How long will it be before the dome of the US Senate is covered in gold and sportsa crescent insignia?i
May 21st, 2009 at 2:47 pm
Islam is literally in the 14th Century. When we (western europeans) were in our 14th century we were beating women, burning heretics at the stake and locked into a single catholic religion. Hundreds of years of civil wars later we finally have a more or less liberal (in Locke’s sense of the word) civil society. For us to expect Islam to magically become a liberal society overnight is insanity. We need to treat them like a very slow and stubborn child. As we attempt to turn them into a liberal civil society there will be setbacks and there will be conflicts. But we must have faith in secular humanism. The basic rights of life, liberty and property are new concepts to Muslim societies. Their societies will come around. People will, eventually, respond to logic and reason. In the meantime we must simultaneously be on our guard and lead them into the 21st century as one would lead a child. This will take generations and there will be blood, both ours and theirs. But in the end they will produce more Ataturks and the march of Western liberal civilization is inexorable unless we lose faith in Locke and Smith. Obama is a product of Locke and Smith. We shall overcome and if the President tosses a few white lies to appease the current generation of fanatics, while subverting the next generation of muslims, I’m all for it.
May 22nd, 2009 at 11:09 pm
What I think is even more dangerous is the threat that the Democratic policy poses to the progress of American society. Our pretensions toward individualism, self determination, and self sufficiency are becoming more and more empty by the day under our growing welfare state. People can get a thousand dollars a month for having a unplanned pregnancy, without working, while simultaneously anyone can be screened for drug use by an employer, everything from movies to newspapers are edited for offensive/subversive content, people are expected to make a decision from either a 20 second sound byte and a high school pretty boy smile, or a 20 minute speech that amounts to the phrase “Decline to Comment.” We are losing our perspective. A person who commits a slow suicide(pills, slit wrists) will often feel relief sheerly from deciding to act and call 911. It happens all the time. Here we are, we the people, and we’re losing the ability to make decisions. Are we going to kill ourselves?
As for the silent assent of the so-called Arab Street, I’m skeptical about that too. I’m sure that everyone here has something they passionately disagree with about some authority, be it the government, their particular political party, or their employer, but don’t do anything about, because they don’t have time or would risk their livelihood or freedom. I know I do. Now go to the third world and see how much time and voice the average person there has. Maybe they think terrorism is a good thing, or maybe they just have more immediate problems. I haven’t asked, and I don’t trust Al-Jazeera to report an accurate poll.
May 25th, 2009 at 9:55 am
Thank goodness (God), TJ, was told the truth by by the Triploitan. There is nothing superior about Islam.
I think President Bush handled this predicament well. I only wish that the war had commenced more quickly.
They attacked us. They have sent people here to plot and plan the attack against the US.
‘From the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli’
I think you are exacly right, Mr Bologna.
Why must we do anything he suggests/orders/ compels. We haven’;t seen his birth certificate. Wasn’t TJ also the person who said No one but a ‘natural- born citizen can be made President.
Remember Jane Fonda saying she would only pay a percentage of her taxes so that she wouldn’t be financing the military-industrial complex. let’s all do that. Only in reverse.
Obama is a Muslim( and a Marxist one to boot).. Just like his father.
He’s exactly the individual TJ feared might win the Presidency one day.
May 30th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
Only want to say your article is astounding. The clarity in your post is simply impressive and i can assume you are an expert on this subject. Well with your permission allow me to grab your rss feed to keep up to date with incoming post. Thanks a million and please keep up the good work
December 24th, 2009 at 2:59 am