How to Measure an Eventual Change with Obama

It is possible that certain premises of change in American politics have effectively begun to make themselves felt with the recent visit by a former American ambassador to Cairo. The next American administration had assigned him a special mission, consisting of giving us the markers of change in American politics on the occasion of President-elect Barack Obama taking office.

In the course of his visit, the ambassador met three people in a cordial meeting at the residence of the American ambassador, Margaret Scobey. These were the ex-ambassador of Egypt to the United States, Nabil Fahmy, the businessman known as Mohamad Chafiq Gabr and myself.

In reality, these old friendly relationships tied me to the former American ambassador since he was a diplomat in Cairo twenty years ago. He told me that he is now retired, and that from time to time he is assigned special missions.

When the ambassador asked me what would give us an indication of change in the new American politics, I answered him: I will let Nabil Fahmy speak of the political aspect and Chafiq Gabr of the economic. As for myself, I will speak of the cultural aspect. In my opinion, I said that the most important indication that would show that the interests of American politics towards the region have changed in an undeniable way is that the United States go back on their hostile and unjustified position towards the Egyptian and Arab candidate for the post of Secretary General of UNESCO. Egypt, as you know, is one of the founding countries of UNESCO more than a half century ago. UNESCO was directed by leaders, coming from Europe, Africa, Latin America and Asia but never from the Arab world. The member countries of UNESCO are unanimously agreed that it is time that this leadership be assigned to an Arab, given their deeply rooted and ancient culture that dates back thousands of year. Without forgetting that an opinion has begun to circulate with force in the heart of UNESCO, which states that the Egyptian minister of Culture, the artist Farouk Hosni, is the best candidate for this post. It is this which has brought countless countries to support the Egyptian candidate as the only Arab, after the withdrawl of the Moroccan candidate. In fact, the African ministers of culture, who recently met in Algeria, have for their part unanimously supported the candidacy of Farouk Hosni, who would then become the candidate of Africa. We do not forget that a large number of countries from Europe, Asia and Latin America have lent their support to the Egyptian candidate, such as France, Italy, Spain, Greece, Mexico, Cuba, Russia, China, India Pakistan, Malaysia and others.

But we have been surprised by the sudden rejection of this candidacy by the American ambassador to UNESCO. It was communicated that he had threatened that his country was going to withdraw from the organization in the event that the members elected the Egyptian candidate. The reason behind this position had nothing to do with the Egyptian candidate himself with whom the United States never objected to as minister of Culture. But the reason is that Israel, because of its deep-seated animosity against the Arabs, would not accept an Arab general director. It took a statement of little value made by the Egyptian candidate to flight; it took it out of context and triggered a campaign against his candidacy.

I said to the ambassador that Israel had mobilized Jewish organizations from around the world in this war. The Simon Wiesenthal Center had sent a letter to the current general director, who is Japanese and who is hostile to the Egyptian candidate to the point that, according to my sources, is also is opposing this candidacy. Israel instrumentalized the United States in much the same way, who suddenly took the same position towards the candidate of a country with whom they have strategic relations in order to take up the declarations that have been constantly repeated by their directors. And in my opinion, this is a humiliating question for the United States.

I added that the special relations that tie the United States to Israel is an American affair that do not concern us at all. We do not ask you to renounce them or to renounce your engagement toward Israel, as you always repeat saying that the maintenance of security for Israel is a priority for you. All this is one thing. What is unacceptable is that your relationship with Egypt and with the Arabs always goes through Israel. It is the right of the Arabs that your relationship with them be regulated by the specific nature of the bilateral relation between the two parties, without being submitted to the approval or disapproval of Israel.

It was always here that Egyptian-American relations were inconvenient. If the new American president chooses to treat this relationship according to the criteria that are dictated and not the Israeli ones, he will bring about an almost reversal in the relationship of his country with the Arab world. This will without a doubt reflect on Egyptian-American relations, not only in the cultural domain but on all other levels.