Obama Wants to Reconcile America and Muslims

The American president, Barack Obama, announced yesterday during his inaugural speech, a certain number of themes without ever being precise. Many waited for him to express himself about the recent events marked by the Israeli aggression against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, but preferred to address the whole Muslim world as a collective, convinced that the Palestinian question had become “the template of international relations.”

The totally new American president has, in fact, proposed to the Muslim world “a new approach founded, he underlined, on mutual interest and respect.” What does this mean? No one referenced Samuel Huntington and his theory of the “clash of civilizations,” but is there such a reference? A priori, it is not in regards to that, but is more basic since both wars Barack Obama inherited occur in Muslim countries. Furthermore, he has become increasingly concerned since, at least, 2001, with the fight against Islamicism even if, for many, the approach would be simpler and much shorter if the world does not add to the distress of the Palestinians by refusing to accede to their demand of justice. Conversely, it is this injustice, which causes despair and anger through the world, including in the United States. We don’t treat hundreds of millions of human beings without the least bit of consequence.

That’s why the new American president seems to want to go and meet a world that gave evidence to his willingness to help make peace. In the context of the Arab peace plan rejected by Israel or the resolutions of the Organization of Islamic Conference, which called on all to satisfy the national rights of the Palestinian people based on the UN resolutions. In a concert of vows and gestures that are also trademarks of friendship, he was simply asked to reverse the order of priorities he has set out and put it high on his agenda: the start of a Palestinian-Israeli negotiation rather than the strengthening of NATO troops in Afghanistan. One recognizes more and more, and rightfully so, that this conflict has become “the templates of international relations.” Obama is careful to respond directly. But his advisers did not wait to give the outlines of his first decisions. Mr. Obama will keep his promises, they confirmed. Therefore, the new president should promptly make a decision about the endless conflict in the Middle East. “World events demand that he acts quickly and I think that you will see him act quickly,” declared the president’s senior adviser, David Axelrod.

It remains unclear what this new approach consists of. Remember when his predecessor launched his famous Greater Middle East (GMO) without ever taking into consideration the Palestinian situation. Or worse, by supporting Israel throughout what he called its right to legitimate defense, while there was still the occupation of the Palestinian territories. For an inauguration speech, we could not expect more than mere declarations of intent. And it is true that what Barack Obama has set forth remains vague and uncertain. At the height of the Israeli aggression, he had set an appointment with international opinion for the period after January 20th. His closest advisers confirm this appointment. But in the meantime many voices, among them U.S. allies, have asked the new U.S. president to review the order of priorities he established and some recommendations accompanied by analysis are considered relevant–a briefing document in a way.