Obama the Egyptian

Published in El Comercio
(Peru) on 7 June 2009
by Carlos Fuentes (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Brandon Brewer. Edited by Katy Burtner.
What an obligation Barack Obama has during his tour through Egypt and the Middle East: overcome the eight disastrous years sowed by the Bush-Cheney administration in the region and restore credibility in U.S. foreign policy. There is something exceptional about President Obama's initiatives. They are all good and necessary, but have encountered resistance from the opposing party and, at times, the president's own party. Consider the following:

- Obama extends his hand, explicitly, to the "Islamic Republic of Iran." Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, does not only not return the gesture, but provokingly accelerates Iran's nuclear program. Obama patiently waits, indicating that "Iran will not prosper as a nuclear power." If it chooses this path, it will only meet resistance and isolation. However, an Iran without nuclear arms will be met with investment, development and international friendship. On the other hand, both China and Russia maintain good relations with Tehran.

- Obama proposes to close the U.S. base in Guantanamo, Cuba. Where will they send the current prisoners? Congressmen and U.S. states, "more papist than the Pope," refuse to accept them. In spite of the fact that there are murderers, sadists, gang members and all types of criminals in maximum-security prisons in the U.S. This ridiculously exaggerated morality is counterbalanced by a clear explanation from President Obama that each detainee, as dangerous as they may seem, has the right to a legal trial - military or civil - and only then are they subject to punishment. What cannot be left out, Obama alleges, is the right to legal proceedings, be it international or domestic. Only justice will define the status of the accused. It is no surprise Obama is a graduate of Harvard Law School, where he was editor of the Harvard Law Review, and that he is also an active practicing lawyer in Chicago.

- In Pakistan, Obama has tried to persuade the government and society, transfixed by the traditional conflict with their Indian neighbors, that the current threat does not come from the east in India, but from the northeast border with Afghanistan. Today, India is one of the most solid emerging economies in the world and military adventures are far from a priority. If Pakistan armed itself to fight Taliban's guerrilla warfare instead of an imaginary war with India, they would not only see a change in armaments and policy, but also in results since the United States has moved its military presence from Iraq to Afghanistan. This is a debatable decision considering that neither Great Britain nor Russia resolved the Afghan dilemma with more troops.

- Afghanistan, like Iraq, will only resolve its problems as Mexico did at one time: dealing with internal social, political and cultural realities. It is obvious that the global world of 2009 is not the nationalist one of 1909, but the underlying reality is the same: foreign intervention cannot substitute domestic/internal evolution. The fact that this is profoundly difficult in Afghanistan, a nation with an incompetent government, a drug economy and the ferocious Taliban, perhaps justifies the U.S. military presence. However, in the end it will be the Afghanis who, as Mexico did, give themselves the government they deserve. The thesis otherwise applies to Iraq, where at the end of a U.S. invasion and seven years of occupation from Al-Malaki's central government is asking Washington to leave in order to unleash a domestic policy that will inevitably lead to conflict between Shiites (Al-Malaki's sect), Sunnis and Kurds close to neighboring Turkey, whose admission into the European community is frowned upon by France and Germany. In other words, Iraq, like Mexico at one point (1915-35), must find an internal solution to its internal politics.

- In this complicated picture, Obama extends a hand to all democratically-elected governments of Latin America. Cuba is not one of them and to rejoin the Organization of American States ("the Ministry of the Colonies"), the charter of the OAS must be reformed as Secretary General José Miguel Insulza has asked. For Obama, the challenge will be to overcome half a century of hostility, skillfully exploited by Fidel Castro, towards the U.S. The obstacles point to Raul Castro's willingness to negotiate in good faith and his brother's intransigence.

- Finally, in the Middle East, Obama has reversed the erroneous policy of the Bush-Cheney administration. It does not take clairvoyance to understand that problems in the region begin and end in the relationship between Israel and Palestine. Clinton understood this, but Bush abandoned this logic to attack an old ally of Washington, Saddam Hussein, putting off the Israel-Palestine situation and unequivocally protecting Israel, a client state of Washington.

Obama has restored the order of priority. First and foremost comes the Israel-Palestine relationship with the stipulations approved by the international community: two sovereign states coexisting side by side, a return to the borders determined by resolutions 194 and 242 of the United Nations, recognition from Israel of the Muslim states of the region including the Saudi Kingdom, and abandonment of the territories seized from Palestine where almost three million Palestinians and barely 300,000 Israelis live.

The obstacles are numerous and we all are familiar with them: the Palestinian authority is corrupt and weak, Palestine is divided between authority and the group Hamas installed in Gaza, the orthodox intransigent Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, refuses to return the occupied territory to Syria and slow the extension of Israeli settlements on Palestinian land. Obama, of course, has an all-powerful weapon: reducing assistance to Israel. He prefers dialogue and persuasion as demonstrated by his difficult interview with Netanyahu in Washington. But, to return to the beginning of this article, Obama introduces a powerful caveat to the talks. If Netanyahu demands that Iran renounce its nuclear program so that there be negotiations, Obama proposes that there first be peace between Israel and Palestine in order for the international community to seriously confront Iran.

Obama, speaking to the Muslim world, admits the mistakes of the United States, but asks that Muslim nations also admit their own.


Menuda obligación tiene Barack Obama durante su gira por Egipto y el Medio Oriente: superar los 8 años de desastre sembrados por la administración Bush-Cheney en la región y devolverle credibilidad a la política exterior de Estados Unidos de América. Hay algo excepcional en las iniciativas del presidente Obama. Todas ellas son buenas y necesarias. Pero encuentran una resistencia negativa de la parte contraria, y a veces, del propio partido del presidente. Consideremos:

- Obama le tiende la mano, explícitamente, a “la República Islámica de Irán”. Ahmadineyad, el presidente iraní, no solo no devuelve el saludo sino que, provocativamente, acelera el programa nuclear iraní. Obama, paciente, espera e indica: Irán no prosperará como potencia nuclear. Por esa vía, solo encontrará resistencia y aislamiento. En cambio, un Irán sin armas nucleares encontrará inversiones, desarrollo y amistad internacionales. Por otra parte, tanto China como Rusia mantienen buenas relaciones con Teherán.

- En Guantánamo, Cuba, Obama se propone cerrar la base estadounidense. ¿Dónde enviar a los actuales prisioneros? Los congresistas y los estados norteamericanos, más papistas que la papa, se niegan a acogerlos. A pesar de que en las prisiones de alta peligrosidad de EE.UU. se encuentran encarcelados asesinos, sadistas, pandilleros y toda laya de criminales. Este ridículo prurito de pureza es contrarrestado por una clara explicación del presidente Obama, en el sentido de que todo detenido, por peligroso que parezca, tiene derecho a proceso legal —militar o civil— y solo entonces, queda sujeto a pena. Lo que no se puede obviar, alega Obama, es el derecho a juicio legítimo, internacional o interno. Solo la justicia definirá el estatus de los acusados. No en balde, Obama es abogado graduado de Harvard, director de la revista de la Escuela de Derecho de esta universidad y practicante activo de la profesión en Chicago.

- En Pakistán, Obama trata de persuadir al gobierno y a la sociedad, mesmerizados por el tradicional conflicto con la India vecina, de que la actual amenaza no viene del este, de la India, sino del noroeste, la frontera con Afganistán. La India es hoy una de las economías emergentes más sólidas del mundo y las aventuras militares no son, ni remotamente, su prioridad. Si Pakistán, en vez de armarse para una imaginaria guerra con India, se armase para combatir a la guerrilla del talibán, cambiaría no solo de armamento y de política, sino de resultados, toda vez que EE.UU. ha virado su presencia militar de Iraq a Afganistán. Debatible decisión: ni la Gran Bretaña, en su momento, ni Rusia, en el suyo, resolvieron el problema afgano con más tropa.

- Afganistán, como Iraq, solo resolverán sus problemas como los resolvió, en su momento, México: dando curso a las realidades sociales, políticas y culturales internas. Que el mundo global de 2009 no es el mundo nacionalista de 1909 es obvio, pero la realidad subyacente es la misma: la intervención exterior no podrá sustituir a la evolución interior. Que esto es sumamente difícil en Afganistán, un país con gobierno incompetente, economía de la droga y feroces talibanes, acaso justifique la presencia militar estadounidense. A la postre, sin embargo, serán los afganos quienes se den —como México en su momento— los gobiernos que se merecen. Tesis, por lo demás, aplicable a Iraq, donde tras de 7 años de invasión y ocupación estadounidense, el gobierno central de Al-Malaki pide la salida de Washington a fin de desatar una política interna que fatalmente conducirá al conflicto entre chiitas (Al-Malaki es de esa persuasión religiosa), sunitas y kurdos cercanos a la vecina Turquía, cuyo ingreso a la Comunidad Europea es mal visto por Francia y Alemania. O sea: Iraq (como México en su momento: 1915-1935) deberá encontrar solución interna a su política interna.

- En este complicado cuadro, Obama les tiende la mano a todos los gobiernos latinoamericanos democráticamente electos. El de Cuba no lo es y para reingresar a la OEA (“el ministerio de las colonias”) la Carta de la Organización deberá ser reformada como lo pide el secretario general José Miguel Insulza. Para Obama, el desafío es superar medio siglo de hostilidades inútiles para EE.UU. y hábilmente aprovechadas por Fidel Castro. Los obstáculos señalan la disposición a negociar en buena fe de Raúl Castro y la intransigencia de su hermano.

- Finalmente, en el Oriente Medio, Obama ha puesto de cabeza la equivocada política de Bush-Cheney. No hay que ser clarividente para entender que los problemas de la región empiezan y terminan en la relación entre Israel y Palestina. Clinton así lo entendió. Bush abandonó esta lógica para lanzarse contra el viejo aliado de Washington, el Iraq de Saddam Hussein, aplazando la solución Israel-Palestina y protegiendo de hecho a Israel, el estado-cliente de Washington.

Obama ha restaurado el orden prioritario. Ante todo, la relación Israel-Palestina y en el sentido aprobado por la comunidad internacional: dos estados soberanos, conviviendo lado a lado. Regreso a las fronteras determinadas por las resoluciones 194 y 242 de la ONU. Reconocimiento de Israel por los estados musulmanes de la región, incluyendo al Reino Saudí. Abandono por Israel de los territorios arrebatados a Palestina, donde viven casi tres millones de palestinos y apenas trescientos mil israelíes.

Los obstáculos abundan. Todos los conocemos. La autoridad Palestina es corrupta y débil. Palestina está dividida entre la Autoridad y el grupo Hamas instalado en Gaza. La intransigencia ortodoxa de Benjamín Netanyahu, el primer ministro israelí, se rehúsa a devolver el territorio ocupado a Siria y a frenar la extensión de asentamientos israelíes en tierras palestinas. Obama, claro, tiene la todopoderosa arma de reducir la asistencia a Israel. Prefiere dialogar y persuadir, como lo demuestra su difícil entrevista con Netanyahu en Washington. Pero, para regresar al inicio de este artículo, Obama introduce un poderoso caveat. Si Netanyahu exige que Irán renuncie a su programa nuclear para que haya negociaciones, Obama propone que primero haya paz entre Israel y Palestina a fin de que la comunidad internacional se ocupe seriamente de Irán.

Obama, hablándole al mundo musulmán, admite los errores de EE.UU. pero pide que los musulmanes, también, admitan los suyos.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Taiwan: The Beginning of a Post-Hegemonic Era: A New Normal for International Relations

Germany: Donald Trump Is Damaging the US

Mexico: Migration: A Political Crisis?

Poland: Los Angeles Riots: Battle for America’s Future

Canada: President Trump, the G7 and Canada’s New ‘Realistic’ Foreign Policy

Topics

Taiwan: Taiwan Issue Will Be Harder To Bypass during Future US-China Negotiations

Venezuela: The Devil in Los Angeles

Germany: Donald Trump’s Military Intervention in LA Is a Planned Escalation

Mexico: Migration: A Political Crisis?

Poland: Los Angeles Riots: Battle for America’s Future

Germany: Donald Trump Is Damaging the US

Canada: President Trump, the G7 and Canada’s New ‘Realistic’ Foreign Policy

Taiwan: The Beginning of a Post-Hegemonic Era: A New Normal for International Relations

Related Articles

Peru: The Coronavirus and Deglobalization

Peru: Julian Assange: ‘Freedom To Inform’ on Trial

Ecuador: We Are at War

Peru: The End of Pax Americana

Peru: Trump and His Threat To Impose Tariffs