Obama Extends His Hand

In November 1863, The Times reported that a hardly inspired President Lincoln had spoken a few unremarkable words during the dedication of a national cemetery for soldiers who had died during the Civil War. The article was referring to the Gettysburg Address, the speech that would go down in history as one of the most brilliant speeches of all times.

This example shows that contemporaries would be wise to have some reservations about deciding on the endurance of presidential addresses. Did the speech that Obama delivered in Cairo on Thursday, indeed have the historical significance that some attributed to it beforehand? That judgment has to be withheld for the moment. But it can already be said with certainty that it was a milestone in relations between the U.S. and the Muslim world—a relationship that has, for the past few years, been so very gloomy.

The uniqueness wasn’t as much in what was said. In reality, most of what Obama held before his audience has already been said by his recent predecessors, including George W. Bush. The speech derived its value in particular from its all-embracing and candid nature, from the eloquence and power of the speaker, in addition to the fact that it was given in the heart of the Arab world.

“America and Islam do not have to compete with each other,” said Obama. And: “Islam has always been a part of America’s story.” No one can say this with more persuasiveness and power than a president whose middle name is Hussein, who can point to his Islamic roots and who doesn’t make a fake impression when he quotes from the Koran—up to three times.

Fortunately, Obama used such background not only to show respect for Islam and to pay tribute to the historical richness of the Arab culture. He took advantage of the opportunity to also voice a few hard remarks, which in the Islamic world are often covered with the cloak of charity–or just hate. He left no doubt that the U.S. would continue to fully fight Al Qaeda and related terror groups.

His unambiguous expression of support for the Palestinian issue was coupled with a clear warning that such support is not well-served by the use of force and that expressions of anti-Semitism are unacceptable. Not insignificant was also that he stood up for freedom of religion and for women’s equal rights.

From a political viewpoint, the most salient passage of Obama’s speech was the clear position against any further expansion of Israeli settlements on Jordan’s West Bank. With this, he has committed himself to a harder line on this tricky point than the one taken, specifically, by the previous resident of the White House. This strictness is very welcome, because the already precarious peace process is seriously undermined by the Israeli settlements policy.

It is possible that a part of Obama’s audience had hoped that he would have provided more concrete political directions towards a solution of the Arab-Israeli conflict. However, the president clearly did not have the intentions of laying on the table the umpteenth roadmap to peace. Most important, he wanted to set down a marker: The Middle-East now has his undivided attention. And he has now dedicated himself to what is his great strength: to bring a melodious message of hope and reconciliation nourished by the conviction that rigid differences can be overcome.

By his own account, Obama is very aware that mountains will not be moved by one speech. And as far as he may have harbored such an illusion, the disparaging reactions out of Tehran and out of the radical Arab camp, should have reminded him that the Middle East is strewn with political landmines that cannot be made harmless by sheer idealism.