Obama calls for ‘new way forward’ with Muslim world: Change makes history

[Neo]

Obama calls for ‘new way forward’ with Muslim world: Change makes history​

WASHINGTON: New US President Barack Obama vowed after swearing in on Tuesday to seek a ‘new way forward’ with the Muslim world, but also warned that the United States will defeat terrorists.

In his first address to the nation as its new leader, Obama echoed campaign promises by saying the United States will “begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people, and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan”.

The first black US president said, “We reject the false choice between our safety and our ideals” of liberty and the rule of law, which critics worldwide say the Bush administration trampled on in its handling of the war on terror.

“Our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint,” Obama said.

“With old friends and former foes, we will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat,” he said, alluding to a new approach of engaging diplomatically with Iran to rein in its nuclear ambitions.

“And for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you,” he said.

He said the United States is a mix of people of different ethnic, language and religious groups from around the world who have tried to overcome tensions and hatred among such groups.

“To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect,” he added.

“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,” he said..

Speaking to a massive crowd that spread across the nearly 3-kilometre National Mall from the Capitol toward the Lincoln Memorial, Obama recalled the words of George Washington, America’s first president, and enjoined Americans against faint-heartedness “in this winter of our hardship”.

“With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come,” the new president said in his 18 1/2-minute inaugural address.

“Let it be said by our children’s children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter.” agencies

Main points of the speech

Foreign Policy:

* US will practice ‘humility and restraint’ and lead by example to revive global US standing

* Will responsibly leave Iraq and ‘forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan’

* Will engage with foes and ‘extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist’

* Will reach out to Muslims worldwide based on ‘mutual interest and mutual respect’

Domestic Policy:

* ‘Bold and swift’ action to revive struggling US economy

* Markets create wealth and spur freedom, but careful oversight is also crucial

* Healthcare and education reforms, action to tackle climate change top domestic priorities

 

[Neo]

Obama Will Be Just Like Bush On The Middle East ​

Tuesday January 20, 2009

When it comes to the Middle East, the new boss, Barack Obama, may well be like the old boss. The only disagreement is who that old boss is. Is it George W. Bush, or is it Bill Clinton, in whose administrations many of those now expected to decide the region's affairs once served?

Barack Obama's enthusiasm for change apparently only extends back to the Clinton years. We will again hear familiar names from those days, such as Dennis Ross, Martin Indyk and Daniel Kurtzer, all of whom served in some capacity in Middle Eastern affairs during the 1990s, mainly in the peace process. Richard Holbrooke, who negotiated the Dayton peace accord for Bosnia-Herzegovina, is another former Clinton official who might get the call to deal with broader regional matters. He is being tipped as Obama's man for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

In Hollywood, you're only as good as your last movie; in Washington, you're only as bad as the media's attention span. That Clinton failed to achieve much in the way of a final Arab-Israeli settlement will scarcely dull the ovation for his recycled policymakers in the Obama administration. For that matter, and our misfortune, the president-elect has also relied on the counsel of castaways from the Jimmy Carter shipwreck, notably Zbigniew Brzezinski. Few today ask how Carter's failures in Iran and Afghanistan entitle Brzezinski to be considered a sage on the Middle East.

A hypothesis: The old boss who Obama will end up imitating is not Bill Clinton--regardless of Hillary at Foggy Bottom--but George W. Bush. Even the idea that Bush was unique as a warmonger may have to be adjusted once Obama escalates American military intervention in Afghanistan, or discovers that talking to Iran "without conditions," as he has ingenuously proposed, won't stop it from developing a nuclear weapons capacity.

The reason Obama will channel George W. Bush in the Middle East is that the room to be different is now so narrow. Bush hardly resembled himself during his second term, when he approximated the kind of president Obama claims he intends to become: one who works with other states consensually, who makes use of international law and institutions and who deals with emerging threats through diplomacy.

But what about Bush the neoconservative? The president's alleged neocon instincts were hardly visible at all during the past four years. If we examine Bush's first-term behavior and pair that with a reading of the National Security Strategy of 2002--an essential vessel of neocon thought (though it also contains plenty of standard "realist" platitudes)--we could reduce these neocon instincts to a few loud ideas: reliance on American pre-emption to neutralize emerging global threats; the retention of American predominance over other states or a group of states; and a willingness to rely on power, particularly military power, in a unilateral way if necessary, to advance American interests.

The writer Paul Berman caught another essential aspect of the neoconservative moment when he drew attention to its style, remarking that it embodied a great many things, not least "a kind of nationalist swagger."

Looking back on Bush's second term, however, we can see how almost all the neocon foreign policy directives evaporated--as did the swagger. In the Middle East, the United States was so pervasively multilateral in its actions that it was unable to get very much done. On Iran, working through the International Atomic Energy Agency and the United Nations went nowhere. If a premise of neocon thought was to act against growing threats preemptively--and Iran's nuclear program would seem to qualify as such a threat--then in 2007, the Bush administration undermined this by releasing a National Intelligence Estimate that derailed any chance of a military attack against Iran's nuclear facilities. Indeed, the U.S. went further and warned Israel against launching an attack.

In Afghanistan, American cooperation with the U.N. and its military efforts through NATO also faltered. Recall that the Afghan intervention came in the heyday of neocon affirmation in Washington. Yet the U.S. went about it multilaterally, gaining all the right certificates of international good behavior. And in Lebanon, as of 2004, the U.S. created a bodyguard of U.N. resolutions to protect the country from Syria, to bring to trial the assassins of Rafiq Hariri and to contain Hezbollah. Yet that didn't prevent Damascus from systematically violating those resolutions and undermining Lebanese sovereignty; nor did it prevent Hezbollah from rearming, despite U.N. decisions, via Syrian territory.

In none of these countries--Iran, Afghanistan and Lebanon--did the U.S. go it alone. The Bush administration tied itself down with ropes of international consent that left room for others to limit American actions. That squared little with the neocon yearning that no state or group of states should balance America in the pursuit of its national objectives.

On the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, too, the U.S. was militantly multilateral, and the net result was again a stalemate. The so-called Quartet, including the U.S., the U.N., Russia and the European Union, was ineffectual largely because domestic Palestinian and Israeli dynamics thwarted a breakthrough. The Bush administration may have exhibited hard-nosedness in the recent Gaza conflict, as it did in Lebanon in 2006, granting Israel considerable latitude to pursue its military actions, regardless of civilian deaths. However, that didn't differ from Bill Clinton's behavior in April 1996, when the Israelis bombed Lebanon and in a single day killed over 100 people at a U.N. base. Nor was American permissiveness on those occasions outside the international consensus. In Lebanon's two wars, as in Gaza recently, there were those in many Western and Arab capitals hoping to see Hezbollah or Hamas weakened.

It has become a de rigueur to describe George W. Bush's Middle East policy as an unmitigated disaster--an example of neocon folly. Yet Bush fell back on the behavior of his predecessors during his second term in embracing behavior that was usually mealy mouthed, consensual, timorous and multilateral--more jaw-jaw than war-war. If that was folly, then Obama, if he's true to his word, is preparing to replicate it.

 

[Al-zakir]

Arabs hope for Obama change, Israelis expect more of same
Wed Jan 21, 2:03 pm ET

CAIRO (AFP) – Arabs were hopeful on Wednesday that President Barack Obama will amend US policy on the Middle East, while Israel expects little change in the wake of its deadly assault on Gaza.

Egypt, a close Washington ally with ties both to Israel and Palestinians, urged Obama to place the Palestinian cause at the top of his agenda as the Islamist Hamas faction said it will judge Obama by his acts.

"We will judge him by his policies and actions on the ground and how he will learn lessons from the mistakes of the previous administrations, especially that of George Bush and his criminal and unjust policies," said Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhum.

Hamas expects Obama "to respect the will of the Palestinian people, support their usurped rights and their right to defend themselves, away from any pressure or bias in favour of Israel," Barhum said in Hamas-ruled Gaza.

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak cabled Obama to congratulate him and said: "This region is looking forward to your handling of the Palestinian cause from the first day of your tenure."

"It is an urgent priority and the key to all the other difficult crises of the Middle East," said Mubarak, whose country is seeking to negotiate a lasting truce between Israel and Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip.

Mubarak's message seems to have been received.

Obama phoned Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas on Wednesday, pledging to work toward a "durable peace" in the Middle East in what Palestinians said was his first call to a foreign leader.

Israeli leaders expressed confidence Obama's policy will not differ too much from those of the Bush administration, which strongly backed the Jewish state.

"The core policy of the United States will certainly not change," Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Chaim Ramon said.

"This policy has two principles: the struggle against terrorism and the need to achieve peace on the basis of two states."

Senior Likud MP Yuval Steinitz recalled Obama's "fruitful" talks with opposition party leader and former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, saying ties between the two men would be "excellent."

Netanyahu is widely tipped to emerge as prime minister after the February 10 elections.

"I took away the impression that Barack Obama understood our distress very well, as well as the cruelty of the enemies we face," Netanyahu said on Tuesday.

Obama visited Israel as a Democratic candidate, offering firm support for the Jewish state and warning a nuclear-armed Iran would be a serious threat.

This week he plans to name former Northern Ireland peacemaker George Mitchell as his Middle East envoy, The Washington Post reported, and the US Senate us due to confirm Hillary Clinton's nomination as secretary of state.

Gulf Arab observers said they did not expect Obama to compromise Washington's strategic alliance with Israel.

"Those who think US policy will reverse 180 degrees are mistaken because they raise the ceiling of hope too much," said Kuwaiti political analyst Sami al-Nasef.

The Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar, which is close to the Hezbollah-led minority in parliament, predicted that "with Obama, US foreign policy in the Middle East will significantly change, especially as concerns Iran."

And the world's largest Muslim body, the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, urged Obama to help foster a constructive dialogue between Islam and the West.

"We warmly welcome your expressed desire to give a major address in a Muslim nation soon after you assume the presidency and hope it will mark the beginning of a more fruitful and better-informed dialogue between the West and the Muslim world," said the OIC which represents 1.5 billion Muslims in 57 countries.

Obama kept a guarded silence during Israel's 22-day military offensive on Gaza that killed more than 1,300 Palestinians and which only ended on Sunday, just two days before the inauguration.

But the tide of global hope that has surged with Obama's arrival has not reached Gaza, where more than 400 children were among the dead.

"Obama won't bring my husband back to life," said Leila Khalil. "He was martyred and left me with six children to feed on my own. And Obama won't repair our house that was damaged in the (air) raids."



Arabs hope for Obama change, Israelis expect more of same - Yahoo! News

 

[HK-47]

I just laughed at the article's title.Nah whether it's a black or a white president and no matter how good an orator you are things will never change.

 

[PakForce Unlimited]

Well, it is hard to predict what President Obama will do coming next four years. But i think the most difficult challenges for him will be "gaining" the confidence\hearts of the muslim world which ex-president Bush soared up with his WoT along with the economic crisis and internal matters of USA like un-employment, future bailouts and US economy in reccesion, the huge debt etc. But it seems hard for me to see him making a "new way forward" with the muslim world when he has big challenges like, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Middle-East and FATA (in Pakistan). What tactics will he use to have a equilibrium between WoT and not to further anger the muslim world?

When it comes to Iraq and WoT, he has pointed out already to close down the Guantanamo Bay within a year. This is a positive reflection regarding to WoT and he has also made several statements on a pullout from Iraq by telling the generals to sort out a plan for the quickest possible pullout and make Iraqi leaders to take more responsibility. It is these two factors wich makes his strong point, however the troops released from Iraq will be slowly phased out and slowly phased into Afghanistan (the real WoT which Obama claims) to combat Taliban and increase effort on rebuilding the country.

Now this is where he has a major challenge, it depends on how he will employ the troops, Taliban offcourse will use this situation fullest to draw attention to Pakistan to make a diplomatic\military mess regarding to FATA. He has once claimed that he would go into Pakistan if there was sufficient evidence to make a move to take out hostile targets and for this he was heavily critized. Therefor it is hard to predict if it will escalate further than today's "silent" drone attacks. But to win Pakistans support he must co-operate with Pakistan as a sovereign nation to gain its fullest support, it must cease drone attacks, and start treat Pakistan more like a valued ally rather than "hired help", after all it is Pakistan who has paid the highest price. I dont know how much the muslim world will appreciate the increased mobilization in Afghanistan as a positive thing, but my best guess is the feelings will be mixed, some claiming it a "zionist" plan other to see it as a better engagment than what Bush did and so on. But if he fails, and do engage within Pakistan, the consequenses can be fatal. The WoT will go down into a negative spiral pouring out more extremism, de-stabilizing and hatred than before, Pakistan as a sovereign nation with about 160m muslims and with a well trained and experienced armed forces is something to reckon with and what consequenses and forces this can unleash in the region. Bottomline is, Obama seems to be a smart guy and if he plays his cards right, this region can have a more stable and prosperous future.

The next challenge is the most troubling because they are somewhat intertwined as I see it, namely Iran and Israel.
Now, President Obama has, during his election supported Israel to the fullest when he sais US will support Israel defending its "right to defend itself" and stand with the traditional support Israel have enjoyed. Now what is uncertain is to ask, was he just saying all this to gain support in the election rally or does he really mean it? By the choice of some people in his staff and cabinet, many of them are very pro-Israel, and this might give us a indication of what to expect. He has also taken a course on dealing with Iran and its supposedly development of nuclear weapons with a more diplomatic approach. But regards of Israel who wants those facilities destroyed and many pro-Israel actors in his staff might not make this possible when Iran refuses to lay down its program. This is the major concern, in the coming years Iran will get closer and closer to produce a working nuclear weapon, and it is not just US, EU and Israel who disapprove this, but several Arab countries is also concerned and traditional "enemies" of the Persian state, like Saudi-Arabia. So here the muslim world is somehow divided to support Iran or not with its N.Program and this gives a incentive to both US and Israel to "make a move", which probably wont be a peaceful act.

To conclude it all, it is with the support of USA that Israel have angered the muslim world over the most over a great time, and it is this which concerns me most and in same time the key issue for this "new way forward" to succeed or not. I dont expect any changes in the support to Israel, and as he has "promised" to engage itself more in the Middle-East to resolve the issue it is diffiucult to see a forthcoming solution when just supporting one actor in the region to the fullest without asking any questions.

Well, this was my point of view and take this as speculations from my side not as facts. Time will tell what he can and will accomplish, to say it best i quote former Pakistani ambassador to the USA; Maleeha Lodhi ¨How Obama manages issues in the Muslim world will determine the success or failure of his foreign policy because it is here that the greatest challenges lie"

PS: Guantanamo Bay closedown executive orders (pdf file)

 

[PakForce Unlimited]

Pak-Afghan region requires wider strategy: Obama
​

WASHINGTON: US President Barack Obama on Thursday said extremists in Pakistan and Afghanistan posed a grave threat that his new administration would tackle as a single problem under a wider strategy.
In announcing a special envoy to the region, Obama said the situation was 'deteriorating' and that the war in Afghanistan could not be separated from the volatile border area with Pakistan, where Al-Qaeda and Taliban elements have regrouped.

'This is the central front in our enduring struggle against terrorism and extremism. There, as in the Middle East, we must understand that we cannot deal with our problems in isolation,' Obama told employees of the State Department.

Obama, saying US strategy would be carefully reviewed, announced the appointment of seasoned diplomat Richard Holbrooke as a special representative to Pakistan and Afghanistan — where the Taliban have come back from their ouster by US-led forces in 2001 to wage a bloody insurgency.

'There is no answer in Afghanistan that does not confront the Al-Qaeda and Taliban bases along the border, and there will be no lasting peace unless we expand spheres of opportunity for the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan,' Obama said.
'This is truly an international challenge of the highest order.'

As a candidate, Obama accused his predecessor of taking his 'eye off the ball' by invading Iraq. He has vowed to send more combat troops to Afghanistan and reiterated Thursday he would place a higher priority on the region.
Obama said Holbrooke 'will help lead our effort to forge and implement a strategic and sustainable approach to this critical region.'

'My administration is committed to refocusing attention and resources on Afghanistan and Pakistan and to spending those resources wisely.'

But the new president gave a stark assessment of the conditions in Afghanistan and its border with Pakistan, warning 'that the American people and the international community must understand that the situation is perilous and progress will take time.'

He said violence was up sharply in Afghanistan and that 'Al-Qaeda and the Taliban strike from bases embedded in rugged tribal terrain along the Pakistani border.'
'And while we have yet to see another attack on our soil since 9/11, Al-Qaeda terrorists remain at large and remain plotting.'

US intelligence agencies suspect Osama bin Laden and other Al-Qaeda figures are operating out of the mountainous border region of Pakistan near Afghanistan.
Holbrooke, best known for forging a peace agreement in 1995 that ended bloodshed in Bosnia, said that Afghanistan and Pakistan were two 'distinct' countries entwined by history and ethnic ties.

'This is a very difficult assignment as we all know,' said Holbrooke, once dubbed the 'Bulldozer' for his no-holds-barred negotiating style in the Balkans.

Obama said that the US diplomatic effort would include working with NATO allies and other states in the region, which could include central Asian countries and India.