Welcome to Cairo President Obama

President Obama deserves our thanks for selecting Cairo as the capital of choice to speak to an Islamic World he wants the U.S. to correct its relation with. This indicates a very perceptive political instinct. At least I hope so. At any rate, I do not think it was a difficult choice. If one wants to speak to the Muslim world, one has to choose the Arab world as the heart of the Islamic world and obviously one has to select Cairo as the heart of the Arab world. I understand that the choice of Cairo has caused a number of arguments in the world including within the U.S. itself. However, such objections clearly confuse Egypt “The History” and Egypt “The System,” which is known for its persistent violations of human rights and strict limitations on the scope of public freedom.

Egypt “The System” is a result of what we can call “the irony of fate” where the system managed to dwarf Egypt “The History.” I believe that Obama understands the vast difference between the two. At any rate, what is certain is that the problems of restricting public freedom and the assault on human rights were not issues of major concern in the choice of Cairo. All the Arab regimes are the same or worse. However, Egypt historically is many things in one. It is Islamic, African, Asian and Mediterranean all in one.

Let us now discuss the possible content of the proposed message to the Muslim world. To assume that America’s relations with the whole world are fine and all that is left for Obama to do is to polish U.S. relations with the Islamic world is, to say the least, an inaccurate assumption open for discussion.

It is true that U.S. relations with the Muslim world appear worse than its relations with most of the rest of the world. This is a proposition that does not need much proof. It is sufficient to notice that the hot wars America is engaged in today are all in Muslim lands. Currently, the U.S. is engaged in direct, fierce wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan along with the proxy wars against Muslims led by Israel and Pakistan on behalf of the U.S.

If we look at the conflicts carefully, we can see that the problem is not the hate of Islam by America as some vehemently argue or the hate of American values and norms of life by Muslims as the other side passionately claims. The conflict is that America assumed that it was the legal heir to the heritage of European colonization [after WWII] and insisted on practicing the same colonial policies albeit through applying different tools.

When the Soviet Union fell, America acted as the Cold War winner who had the sole right to tighten her fist, and to enforce her values and life style on the whole world. She assumed that her system was the more developed and the more worthy of following because it emerged victorious in the Cold War round.

The Neocons’ choice of the “Greater Middle East” as a stage of operations for the final round to complete American control of the Middle East was not, in my opinion, motivated by a special hatred for Islam or Muslims, but by certain factors including oil, Israel’s security and the weakness of the Arab governments. The Neocons built their calculations on the false assumption of an expected ease of toppling Saddam’s regime with a domino effect to follow that would topple the systems in Syria, Palestine, Iran, and Lebanon. Their calculations proved to be based on ideological illusions and beliefs, not on scientific and pragmatic analysis.

Accordingly, the disaster was huge not only for the Muslim world, which suffered the largest share of destruction, but also for the whole world including the U.S. itself. It was natural then, especially after the predicament of the capitalist system, that strong reactions arose demanding structural changes not only in the American political system, but also in the world order at large.

Obama clearly understands that without the mistakes committed by the Neocons’ government, he would have never been able to advance even a single step towards the White House. He also understands that Americans elected him to put in effect the needed changes and not for any other purpose. It seems that he knows precisely the size and type of changes needed and the idea that he is the only one qualified to lead such a quest may be due to his ethnicity, religious roots and superb education.

The question, however, is: Can he achieve the changes needed and turn hope into reality? I think that it is too early to make such assessment. In spite of the fact that, for many, he seems confused and hesitant especially after reversing his own decision to close Guantanamo and military courts, I am still optimistic about both him and his abilities, and think that we should give him some more time.

Certainly, a person with Obama’s intelligence, natural abilities and charisma must be aware of the size and nature of the obstacles that can restrain his ability to make the necessary changes. He must also be aware that such changes are primarily for America’s interest, but also for the good of the whole world. But we cannot predict if he will play it safe and succumb to the forces that will try to convince him of superficial changes to serve their own interests of preserving the status quo or if he knows that his future and legacy are tied to achieving the needed changes. Both assumptions are equally possible. Soon, his plans, abilities and intentions will be clear. Before he comes to Cairo with his long awaited message to the Muslim world, he will have completed discussions with the concerned parties of the Palestinian problem in Washington. That will be his “acid test”.

I do not think the Islamic world needs to hear rhetoric and honey-coated speeches over the extent of his respect for Islam, for him to write us a certificate clearing Islam of the false accusation of terrorism or to hear from him repeated slogans about the interest of all of us in resisting terrorism which has no religion and is practiced by many. And since U.S. problems are with the whole world and not with Islam and Muslims alone, he must direct his speech from the Al Azhar pulpit to all who need the U.S. to change. He must assure them of abandoning the domination project along with the assurances that the U.S. intends to pursue the creation of a new multi-polar world order. To prove his good intentions, he must declare from Cairo his commitment to several points specifically:

1. To abandon the use of tveto power to protect countries in violation of international laws.

2. To take the necessary steps to guarantee that the U.S. joins the International Court of Justice.

3. Serious attempts to reform UN organizations.

Obama also knows that the Muslim nations he intends to address from the Al Azhar pulpit suffer under the yoke of their despotic rulers. However, these people do not want Obama to impose the American model on them through military force. They only want the commitment of his administration to respect the rules of international law and to support imposing such rules on all. If this happens, the life of despotic governments in our Arab and Islamic world will be very short.

Hoping to hear this from Obama in Cairo, it is natural to warmly welcome him.