Tra qualche giorno il Presidente degli Stati Uniti, Barack Obama, si rivolgera’ al mondo islamico in un importante discorso che terra’ al Cairo. Il tema e’ centrale nella nuova politica estera americana, dopo i dissapori, i contrasti e il duro confronto generati dalle politiche della precedente Amministrazione americana. Si e’sviluppato un dibattito “preventivo” su cosa Obama dovrebbe dire alle grandi masse musulmane. La discussione si e’ polarizzata su due approcci radicalmente diversi, di cui riporto qui di seguito due esempi. Il primo, piu’ articolato e probabilmente piu’ in linea con le sensibilita’ di Obama (sviluppato in particolare da Juan Cole), consiglia di valorizzare l’agenda “positiva”, mettendo in luce la netta discontinuita’ del nuovo Presidente su temi quali i diritti umani (Guantanamo) e le questioni globali (ad esempio, la promozione di politiche che tendano a ridurre le asimmetrie socio-economiche strutturali). Il secondo, ben rappresentato Juan C. Zarate e James K. Glassman, e’ invece piu’ “assertivo”, piu’ centrato su questioni strategiche e di sicurezza, e rischia di riprodurre l’atteggiamento “normativo” della precedente Amministrazione nei riguardi del mondo islamico, basato su una sorta di “dettato” delle regole del gioco secondo la prospettiva americana. Io preferisco il primo approccio, senza tuttavia negare che nel secondo vi siano importanti argomentazioni, anche se a mio avviso male declinate. Qui di seguito i due interventi.
President Barack Obama's determination to alter the terms of the relationship between the United States and the Muslim world has so far mainly been displayed in his rhetoric. White House aides say that he will focus in his speech in Cairo on Thursday on commonalities between American and Muslim values, and will stress the need to fight extremism. Most Muslims, however, tell pollsters that they do not hate the American way of life or our values, but rather Washington's policies. They will want to hear what concrete steps Obama will take to address the American wars, occupations and commitments that trouble them. In order to make a genuine and lasting impact, Obama needs to tell the Muslim world that the long years in the desert for the Palestinian people are over and that he will devote his energies to ensuring the establishment of a viable Palestinian state by the end of his first term. No one in the region believes in the so-called peace process any more, inasmuch as progress has been scant and the condition of the Palestinians has steadily worsened. Obama needs to underline his commitment to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq on the timetable approved by the Iraqi parliament, that is, by the end of 2011. He needs to counter the statements of some of his generals casting doubt on that timetable. He should point out that he is acting in accordance with the wishes of an elected Arab parliament in Baghdad and their constituents. Likewise, he needs to reaffirm that, despite opposition from his own party, he will close the Guantanamo Bay prison, a symbol of torture. Obama faces an uphill task. Polling shows that approval ratings for the United States plummeted in most of the Muslim world during the past eight years. A Gallup poll based on face-to-face interviews in 10 Muslim-majority countries last summer found that only 15 percent approved of the leadership that the United States had shown on the global stage. Majorities or pluralities in most of the ten countries polled by Gallup said that their opinion of the United States would significantly improve if it withdrew its troops from Iraq and closed Guantanamo Bay. Other practical steps that would change their minds, most said, included greater direct humanitarian aid, help with transfer of technology and business expertise, and support for the right of Muslim publics to elect their own governments. The good news is that most of the 1.5 billion Muslims in the world are not holding up signs that say, "Yankee go home!" They want an engagement with the United States, but they want that relationship to proceed on the basis of mutual respect. They want the U.S. to help them get wired and start businesses and improve their health and move toward greater democracy. On the positive side, then, President Obama needs to lay out how his economic policies and posture on health, global warming, world trade and finance will help pull the world, including the Muslim world, out of its current economic doldrums. He needs to stress the positive role the United States has played in providing Muslims with the everyday technology, innovations and social tools to create a better life for themselves. Obama needs to convince Muslims that America respects their sovereignty even as it reaffirms its commitment to democracy and human rights, and that the U.S. stands for further investments in improving peoples lives. He must point out that those investments can only bear fruit if radicals and war-mongers both in the region and in the West are decisively side-lined.
(CBS News website, 1 June 2009. Juan Cole teaches history at the University of Michigan. He is author of the recent book, Engaging the Muslim World - Palgrave Macmillan, 2009 - and maintains the weblog “Informed Comment”.)
When President Obama delivers his much-anticipated address in Cairo this week, he should counter the deadly and pervasive narrative that "the West is at war with Islam" and replace it with a more accurate story line that offers Muslims both responsibility and pride. With his Muslim family members and his personification of the American dream, Obama is uniquely placed to recast the way American power and influence are viewed. Although he will need to acknowledge what most Muslims see as U.S. mistakes, an endearing and short-lived mea culpa is not ambitious enough for the task at hand. Instead, the president should shape a new narrative - one that reminds the world of American ideals and challenges Muslim communities to confront conflicts in their midst. While the United States will continue to be a partner, the ultimate outcome will be determined by them, not us. The president should point to three separate but overlapping struggles:
• Religion and terror: A small group of violent reactionaries - led by Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and allied groups - is trying, through horrifying brutality, to bring more than 1 billion Muslims into line with a sweeping totalitarian doctrine, inconsistent with the tenets of Islam. It`s up to Muslims to oppose and ostracize the violent extremists in their rnidst. Growing numbers of them are doing that - even in Pakistan, where a terrible threat had been widely ignored.
• Iran and proxies: Along with its proxies - Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas - Iran is confronting the vast majority of Arab nations, including Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt. This Iran-v. Arab conflict is also part of the Sunni-Shiite conflict that is playing out elsewhere, including Iraq. But Iran`s threat transcends religion. Regardless of sectarian bent, Muslim communities need to oppose the attempts by Iran and its intelligence services - in particular the Qods Force - to extend Shiite extremism and influence throughout the world. Articles in the Arab press have expressed concern that the United States is softening its stance toward the Iranian camp. Egyptians would welcome a statement that clarifies America`s opposition to Iranian domination of the Middle East.
• Democracy and human rights: Many Arab governments have denied their citizens what
Egyptian activist Saad Eddin Ibrahim has called "the infrastructure of democracy": rule of law, independent judiciary, free media, gender equality and autonomous civil society. These necessities of liberty are more important than ballots dropped in a box, as we have seen by the actions of the Hamas regime in Gaza. A widespread criticism among Muslims is that the United States has not pressed authoritarian allies to democratize. For both moral and strategic reasons, we have a stake in supporting free societies with accountable governments. The reality of democracies thriving in Muslim societies like Turkey and Indonesia is a powerful counterweight to the canard that Islam and political freedom can`t coexist. In framing the narrative as a series of struggles within Muslim societies, Obama must also emphasize America`s values - concepts of pluralism, freedom and opportunity that run counter to the extremists` ideology. He should emphasize that the United States won`t be a passive bystander in these struggles. We will advance our own ideals and interests - which include promoting a comprehensive two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians. Challenging and empowering Muslim communities to take on the three great struggles themselves, with the United States as a constructive partner, is an approach that will overturn the extremists` narrative and help shape a new, honest, and positive story line in which Muslims see themselves not as victims but as central protagonists in global struggles for justice.
(Boston Globe, 27 May 2009. Juan C. Zarate, former deputy national security adviser, is senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. James K. Glassman former undersecretary of state, is president of the World Growth Institute.)
