Is It Possible to Start Over?

Published in El Nuevo Diario
(Nicaragua) on 8 June 2009
by Gioconda Belli (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Karissa Cain. Edited by Katy Burtner.
After centuries of iniquity, is it possible to start over? Can we delete history and start with a fresh slate? For as much as one wants to believe it, experience reminds us of how slowly offenses heal. In the oppressed, betrayed states, it is almost as if there has been some sort of genetic modification so that people are distrusting and don’t believe in promises. If, some day, that tendency can be overcome and people once again begin to believe, but then the disillusion relapses, it would be difficult to recuperate faith and optimism. He who is burned by milk doesn’t only blow on the curdle, as we say; he who is burned by milk sees a cow and cries, as they say in Argentina.

Despite this, we must recognize that hope is stubborn. Humanity has believed in change time and time again. Its conviction to transform and be transformed has allowed it to relieve enormous tragedies. “Fill the crater with bombs/And we will sing again/And we will plant again/Because we will never declare life defeated,” says an anonymous Vietnamese poem. And this is because life does not flourish in distrust; it becomes stagnant. It is undeniable that trenches fulfill a function, but one cannot live indefinitely in the trenches. As much fear as it causes to leave refuge, one has to dare to leave at ceasefire and face forward to embrace opportunity.

President Barack Obama’s speech at the University of Cairo on June 4th made me ask myself if humanity has currently found itself in one of those rare moments in history that deserves not only the benefit of doubt, but also decided support of an impulse that supports the will of this president, in particular, to correct the wrong course that we’ve been headed down for decades.

Among all past presidents of the United States, Barack Obama stands out not only because of his skin color, but also because of his life experience. This man has not only dealt with racial discrimination first hand, but he also knows what it’s like to live in the third world. Until his speech in Cairo, many of us had been observing him cautiously and quietly, deciding if we should give him a whole-hearted stamp of approval.

After that intervention, however, I, at the very least, do not have any doubt that Obama is betting on executing a serious change in the course of American foreign policy. It’s obvious that a speech is a speech, but it is also true that the way it is delivered and its context changes it, in my opinion. It is a manifest of luck of the Obama administration, not only about the Middle East, but also about the principles that Obama aspires to implement with regard to the United States’ relations with the rest of the world. If he is able to achieve it depends less on his internal enemies - at the moment, a minority in the House and Senate - and more on international leaders.

I want to highlight several components of his speech and show why we need to keep in mind the change in course he discussed. As is the case with many speeches, this one had many key components that couldn’t be missed by one who is familiar with the issues. And coming from a North American president, many of these affirmations denote a substantial change in focus and attitude toward the third world. Following, I will first indicate the context and transcribe the quotes that seemed important.

In the beginning, after referring to the centuries of tension and religious wars between the West and Islam, he says: “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.”

About the United States: “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.”

About interdependence between nations: “Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. So whatever we think of the past, we must not be prisoners of it. Our problems must be dealt with through partnership; progress must be shared.”

About Iraq: He cites Thomas Jefferson, who said, "I hope that our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be." And he added, “Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a better future - and to leave Iraq to Iraqis.”

He reiterated collaboration with Israel, but added: “On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people - Muslims and Christians - have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations - large and small - that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own…the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security.”

About nuclear weapons: “We have reached a decisive point ... I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons.”

About democracy: “So let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other. That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone. But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere…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.”

In conclusion, among other things, he said, “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.”

In all of my life, I have never heard a North American president abandon arrogance the way [Obama] did, admitting not only the sequels of colonialism but also the instrumentalization that the U.S., as well as the Soviet Union, made of Arabic countries and Africa. It is significant that he emphasized the fact that the United States rose up against an empire and even more so that he rejected the idea that one nation should rise above the rest, should decide who has nuclear arms and who does not, or impose a system of government. Iraq should be left to the Iraqis, he said, at the same time that he lamented the United States’ presence in Afghanistan.

His support and clarity around the Palestinian issue was meridional; he recognized the suffering of the Palestinians, actually called the occupation an “occupation,” and asked for cessation of assents and recognition of Palestine as its own state. In referring to violence, he did it by condoning its use by all sides under equal terms. With respect to his references to democracy, he was skillful at pointing out that aspirations for liberty, state rights, transparency and everything else are not North American values but rather the basic human rights of all.

His call toward the end to search for commonalities echoes his initial words, in which he asked for the opportunity for a new start, based on mutual interest and respect, that puts an end to distrust and discord.

It is evident that this speech provides for certain novel predicates that are not limited to the United States’ relations with the Arab world. Rather, it transcends that and presents a vision of a statesman that hopes for a role where the power of his country can develop into a factor for progress and conciliation within the new global context.

As I said in the beginning, it is difficult to overcome distrust. Suspicion of and hostility toward the United States is not a gratuitous invention. It is founded in numerous instances of abuse of power and violation of rights of states. But as citizens of this world, not of our fathers or grandfathers, we are obligated to consider history’s lesson: exceptional individuals are able to achieve what may appear impossible, for the good and the bad.

President Obama has four, maybe eight, years to demonstrate that the spirit of his speech bears fruit. The world that has suffered at the hands of the United States has two roads: rejection of Obama’s words to remain in the trenches, or acceptance of the challenge; not to drop one’s guard, but to rise to the challenge of President Obama’s agenda to enact concrete change, common concrete projects that implicate and alter the aggressive tradition of North American diplomacy. Even more than “respect” - a demand that in Nicaragua, recently, only hides the necessity for a party that assumes power with impunity to discredit democracy - a new vision by the United States of its own role could mean a more just, clean, equitable, and humane world for everyone. As Lenin said, “We should dream,” and I would add, give hope a shot.


Tras siglos de iniquidad, ¿es posible comenzar de nuevo? ¿Puede la historia hacer borrón y cuenta nueva? Por mucho que uno quisiera creerlo, la experiencia nos habla de lo lento que cicatrizan los agravios en la piel de los pueblos. En los pueblos oprimidos, traicionados, casi que se viene al mundo genéticamente modificado para ser desconfiado y no creer en promesas. Si algún día, superada esa tendencia, se vuelve a creer, y reincide la desilusión, es difícil recuperar ya la fe y el optimismo. El que se quema con leche, no sólo la cuajada sopla, como decimos nosotros; el que se quema con leche, ve una vaca y llora, como dicen en Argentina. A pesar de esto hay que reconocer que la esperanza es testaruda. La humanidad ha creído en los cambios una y otra vez. Ha sido la convicción en su propia capacidad de transformar y transformarse la que la ha hecho remontar enormes tragedias. “Rellenamos el cráter de las bombas/Y de nuevo cantamos/Y de nuevo sembramos/ porque jamás la vida se declara vencida”, dice un poema anónimo vietnamita. Y es que la vida no florece en la desconfianza; se estanca. Es innegable que las trincheras cumplen una función, pero no se puede vivir eternamente atrincherado. Por mucho miedo que produzca la idea de dejar el refugio, uno tiene que atreverse a salir a la hora del cese al fuego y mirar de frente las oportunidades.

El discurso del presidente Barack Obama en la Universidad del Cairo el 4 de Junio, me hizo preguntarme si la humanidad no estará en este momento de la historia frente a una de esas raras oportunidades que merecen, no sólo el beneficio de la duda, sino el respaldo decidido de un impulso que potencie la voluntad de este presidente en particular de corregir el rumbo equivocado de décadas de historia.

Entre todos los presidentes norteamericanos de los últimos tiempos, Barack Obama sobresale, no sólo por el color de su piel, sino por su experiencia de vida. Este hombre no sólo ha experimentado en carne propia la discriminación racial; sino que también sabe cómo es y qué significa vivir en el Tercer Mundo. Hasta su discurso en El Cairo, muchos como yo hemos estado observándolo cauta y calladamente, antes de decidirnos a afirmar categóricamente un juicio positivo. Después de esa intervención, sin embargo, a mí al menos no me quedan dudas de que Obama está apostando a dar un golpe de timón serio en la política exterior norteamericana. Es obvio que un discurso es un discurso, pero también es cierto que la manera en que fue pronunciado y el contexto de éste, lo convierten, según mi opinión, es una suerte de manifiesto de la administración Obama, no sólo sobre el Medio Oriente, sino sobre los principios que él aspira imprimir a la relación de Estados Unidos con el resto del mundo. Que lo logre o no depende tanto de sus enemigos internos –por el momento en minoría en el Congreso y el Senado-, como de sus interlocutores internacionales.

Quiero resaltar aquí algunos aspectos de su contenido y señalar por qué afirmo que es un giro de timón a tener en cuenta, pues como sucede en muchos discursos, éste está lleno de claves que al buen entendedor no pueden pasarle desapercibidos, en cuanto que, viniendo de un presidente norteamericano, muchas de estas afirmaciones denotan un cambio sustantivo de enfoque y actitud vis a vis el Tercer Mundo. A continuación indico primero el contexto y transcribo las citas que me parecieron importantes.

Al inicio, tras referirse a los siglos de tensiones por las guerras religiosas entre Occidente y el Islam dice: “luego las tensiones se alimentaron del colonialismo que le negó derechos y oportunidades a muchos Musulmanes y de la Guerra Fría donde los países de mayoría Musulmana fueron muy a menudo tratados como peones sin ninguna consideración para con sus propias aspiraciones.”

Sobre Estados Unidos: “Así como los Musulmanes no caben en crudos estereotipos, Estados Unidos no es el crudo estereotipo de un imperio velando sólo por sus propios intereses. Los Estados Unidos han sido una de las mayores fuentes de progreso que el mundo ha conocido. Nacimos de una revolución contra un imperio…”

Sobre la interdependencia entre las naciones: Dada nuestra mutua dependencia, cualquier orden mundial que eleve una nación o grupo de gente por encima de otro, fracasará inevitablemente. Así que sea lo que sea que pensemos del pasado, no debemos ser prisioneros de éste. Debemos abordar nuestros problemas como socios; el progreso debe de ser compartido.

Sobre Irak: Citó a Thomas Jefferson, que dijo: “Espero que con nuestra poder, crezca nuestra sabiduría de manera que aprendamos que nuestro poder será mayor en la medida en que menos lo usemos”. Y añadió: “Hoy América tiene una doble responsabilidad: ayudar a Irak a forjarse un mejor futuro y dejarle Irak a los Iraquíes.”

Reiteró la colaboración con Israel, pero añadió: “Por otro lado, es innegable que el pueblo Palestino –Musulmán y Cristiano- ha sufrido en la búsqueda de una Patria. Por más de sesenta años han soportado el dolor de la dislocación. Muchos esperan en campos de refugiados en la Ribera Oeste, Gaza y tierras aledañas por la vida de paz y seguridad que nunca han podido vivir. Soportan las diarias humillaciones –pequeñas y grandes- que resultan de la ocupación. De manera que no quepa la menor duda: la situación del pueblo Palestino es intolerable. América no dará la espalda a las legítimas aspiraciones de dignidad, oportunidad y un estado propio del pueblo Palestino….la resolución es que las aspiraciones de ambas partes sean realizadas a través de dos estados, en los cuales Israelitas y Palestinos puedan vivir en paz y seguridad.
Sobre los armamentos nucleares: “Hemos llegado a un momento decisivo….Entiendo las protestas de quienes argumentan que unos pueblos tienen armas nucleares y otros no. Ninguna nación por sí sola tendría que poder elegir qué otra nación pueda o no poseer armas nucleares. Por eso es que reafirmo el compromiso de América de lograr un mundo donde ninguna nación posea armas nucleares.”

Sobre la democracia: “Déjenme decirlo claramente: Ninguna sistema de gobierno puede o debe ser impuesto a una nación por otra nación. Esto no resta de mi compromiso con los países donde el gobierno refleja la voluntad popular. Cada nación da vida a sus principios a su manera, en base a sus propias tradiciones. América no quiere presumir de saber qué es lo mejor para todos… Pero tengo la profunda convicción de que los pueblos quieren ciertas cosas: quieren la libertad de expresarse y opinar sobre la manera en que desean ser gobernados, quieren tener confianza en que se respeten las leyes y se administre la justicia de igual manera para todos, quieren un gobierno transparente que no robe lo que le pertenece al pueblo, quieren tener la libertad de elegir. Estas no son sólo ideas Americanas, son derechos humanos y por eso es que nosotros los apoyaremos en cualquier parte…. Hay quienes invocan la democracia sólo cuando están fuera del poder; una vez que llegan al poder son implacables en suprimir los derechos de los demás. No importa donde se asiente, el gobierno del pueblo exige un estándar a quienes ostentan el poder: deben mantener su poder por consenso, no coerción; deben respetar el derecho de las minorías y participar con espíritu de tolerancia y compromiso, deben colocar el interés popular y el funcionamiento legítimo del proceso político por encima de sus propios partidos. Sin estos ingredientes, las elecciones por sí mismas no hacen la verdadera democracia”

Para terminar, entre otras cosas dijo: “Todos nosotros compartimos el mundo por un breve instante en el tiempo. El asunto es si escogemos ese tiempo para permanecer concentrados en lo que nos separa, o si nos comprometemos en el esfuerzo –en el esfuerzo sostenido- de encontrar coincidencias y de concentrarnos en el futuro que aspiramos para nuestros hijos y en el respeto a la dignidad de todos los seres humanos.”

En lo que tengo de vida, jamás había oído yo a un Presidente norteamericano dejar de lado la arrogancia de esta manera; admitir no sólo las secuelas del colonialismo, sino la instrumentalización que tanto EEUU, como la URSS hicieron de los países árabes y del África. Me pareció significativo que exaltara el hecho de que los EEUU hubiesen surgido de la rebelión contra un imperio y más significativo me pareció la manera reiterada en que rechazó la idea de que una nación se coloque por encima de las demás, que decida quién tiene armas nucleares o no, o que imponga a otros su sistema de gobierno. Irak debe dejarse a los iraquíes, dijo, al tiempo que lamentó la permanencia de EEUU en Afganistán. Su apoyo y claridad en cuanto al asunto Palestino fue meridiana; reconoció el sufrimiento del pueblo Palestino, llamó ocupación a la ocupación, pidió el cese de los asentamientos y el reconocimiento del derecho del pueblo Palestino a su propio estado y cuando se refirió a la violencia, lo hizo condenando su uso por ambos lados en iguales términos. En cuanto a las referencias a la democracia, creo que fue hábil al señalar que las aspiraciones de libertad, estado de derecho, transparencia y demás, no son valores norteamericanos, sino derechos humanos de todos los pueblos.

Su llamado hacia el final, de buscar coincidencias, hace eco de sus palabras iniciales donde pidió la oportunidad de un nuevo comienzo, basado en el respeto e interés mutuo, que ponga fin a la desconfianza y discordia predominante.

Es evidente que este discurso sienta ciertos predicados novedosos que no se limitan a las relaciones de EEUU con el mundo árabe, sino que lo trascienden y presentan la visión de un estadista que desea un rol donde el poder de su país pueda convertirse en un factor de progreso y de conciliación dentro del nuevo contexto global.

Como decía yo al principio, ciertamente es difícil superar las desconfianzas. El recelo y hostilidad contra Estados Unidos no es un invento gratuito. Está fundamentado por innumerables abusos de poder y violaciones de ese país a los derechos de los pueblos. Pero, como ciudadanos de este mundo, no del de nuestros padres o nuestros abuelos, tenemos la obligación de considerar las lecciones de la historia que muestran cómo individuos excepcionales pueden lograr lo aparentemente imposible, así en el mal, como en el bien.

El Presidente Obama tiene cuatro, lo más ocho años de plazo para demostrar que el espíritu que se lee en este discurso puede dar frutos. El mundo que ha sufrido a los Estados Unidos tiene dos caminos: el rechazo a sus palabras para seguir en las trincheras, o la aceptación de este reto no para bajar la guardia, sino para subirle la parada a la agenda del Presidente Obama proponiendo cambios concretos, proyectos comunes concretos que lo comprometan y alteren la tradición agresiva de la diplomacia del norte de manera duradera. Más allá del “respeto” –exigencia que en Nicaragua recientemente sólo esconde la necesidad de un partido de afianzarse impunemente en el poder en menoscabo de la democracia- una nueva visión de su propio rol por parte de Estados Unidos podría significar un mundo más justo, más limpio, más equitativo y humano para todos. Como dijo Lenin: “Hay que soñar”, y atreverse a la esperanza, añadiría yo.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Canada: No, the Fed Was Not ‘Independent’ before Trump

Spain: State Capitalism in the US

Poland: Marek Kutarba: Donald Trump Makes Promises to Karol Nawrocki. But Did He Run Them by Putin?

Germany: Donald Trump’s Failure

Austria: The US Courts Are the Last Bastion of Resistance

       

Topics

Germany: When Push Comes to Shove, Europe Stands Alone*

Guatemala: Fanaticism and Intolerance

Venezuela: China: Authoritarianism Unites, Democracy Divides

Israel: Antisemitism and Anti-Israel Bias: Congress Opens Investigation into Wikipedia

Spain: Trump, Xi and the Art of Immortality

Germany: We Should Take Advantage of Trump’s Vacuum*

Sri Lanka: Qatar under Attack: Is US Still a Reliable Ally?

Taiwan: Trump’s Talk of Legality Is a Joke

Related Articles

Nicaragua: Trump’s Trade War Will Not Make America ‘Great Again’

China: Nicaragua Withdraws from OAS, Denounces Yankee Imperialism

Guatemala: Defending Freedom against Tyrants

Taiwan: Expert Eye: Is Taiwan a Democratic Commodity in the US-Chinese Trials of Strength?

Czech Republic: The Farce Looks a Little Different

Previous article
Next article
  1. Gioconda, I commend your efforts to cover and comment on what seemed to me as a Scotsman, therefore fairly neutral, a very inspirational speech by Obama. It addressed enough key global issues in sufficient detail, as to qualify the speech as monumental. It would seem US now has a president that is capable of addressing the evolving issues that arise for such a large nation and key global player such as the United States. I fear your comment “Among all past presidents of the United States, Barack Obama stands out”. I sincerely do hope that he is the first US President to avoid the end that too many other positive presidents have suffered.
    However, from Obama’s communication in the Cairo speech, you do get the impression this man means business on a morally and fair trajectory. If he adds a promise to ensure press coverage of international affairs in his own country becomes as neutral as here in the UK, then I will salute him. Many Americans comment on how dull-down TV saturates the livingrooms across the United States and they wish it were as independent as other countries. So, while Obama has a near-impossible to-do-list already, maybe he can add cleaning up domestic media to the list.
    History can not and will not be forgotten and I truly believe that in order to progress with a clean slate, you have to leave a little corner of your tablet to treasuring the past and ensuring its knowledge becomes the wisdom of the future.

  2. take a trip through america and then you will see the real america.

    few americans very few see themselves as imperialists even with 700 military bases around the world. if 700 military bases around the world is not imperialism than what is?

    but we will learn our lessons. yes the hard way but that appears how we humans tend to learn our lessons.

    ike warned us what would happen if we did not detune our military during peace time but no one listened to him in 1961.

    but as long as the chinese and the kings and the socialists loan us money and the dollar is the world standard we can maintain our existing standard of living.

    our standard of living has be declining for four decades but borrowed money keeps us from feeling that decline until recently.

    america is becoming a failed nation but it must fail as capitalism must fail as it exploits its people for the benefit of the few.

    again travel america go to the small towns and see the towns boarded up. visit the ghettos and the overfilled prisons.

    dont believe what you hear and see on the american mass media. they are contolled by the industrial military complex and corporations that advertise on them.

    even our universities are contolled by this military complex and corporations through grants. universities worship at the altar of these grants.

    with communism man exploits man with capitalism it is the other way around.

    how few in the world understand that simple axiom.

    there is an american mentality that thinks it can buy its way out of anything. we just paid 200 million to a small island to take some chinese from gitmo.

    oh the money was borrowed from china. 🙂