In the lead up to the American election in 2008 one of the main accusations made by the Republicans was that Obama lacked both international and political experience. Well he’s gaining the experience now, but at a cost. Obama is a visionary, but visions need to be put into action, that requires pragmatists. Pragmatists (as opposed to realists, which seems to be a boast more that a label) can say no, this won’t work and then work toward achieving something like what was wanted or next best thing.
Obama wanted to change America’s standing around the world. In Europe, that wasn’t difficult. Firstly, he wasn’t George. W and secondly the Europeans got caught up in the Romance of the Obama election victory. They understood both how incredulous the victory was and what the social ramifications could be.
The Arab Middle East is not Europe; and Middle Eastern politics is a completely different reality. The guy kissing you warmly on both cheeks is as likely to plotting your death as what to offer you to eat. The modern political states are colonially imposed realities, and now Islam is quickly replacing Arabism as the major expression of self-identity across the region.
Would they like Obama because he is black and his father was a Muslim? Well the fact that his father was a Muslim works against him. His father‘s religion determines his religion according to Islam (and Christianity). He has therefore rejected the religion. Interestingly enough being black doesn’t work for him in an area where the blacks are openly seen as inferior. He was never going to be greeted as a folk hero, but was definitely seen as more amenable to the Arab voice.
Incidentally this amenability does not always generate a grateful reaction and can often be seen as a weakness. Promises for money, is easy money, because those promises are made in English for those people. The American way of buying approval doesn’t work in the Middle East. Americans deal with the governments. These governments are largely distrusted by the people. The Arab state that has a modicum of democracy is Lebanon and they are being held hostage by a terror organisation (as is the whole south of the country which had traditionally been the Christian part of the country).
After more than a year in power, Obama’s standing in the Arab countries has not changed. His obvious conclusion was that it must be because of the Palestinian/ Israeli conflict and more specifically Israel. He did not conclude that it might be because in that year in power not only has American not reduced its troops in either Iraq or Afghanistan, in fact the opposite. They have been increased. Yet Obama seems to believe he has credibility. I suggest that Obama’s posturing has led the Arabs to surmise that they may be able to achieve much by sidling up to him. The question is, who will play who? The wilier side will.
For this reason Obama’s posturing on Israel and Iran has been particularly instructive. The nuclear issue and Iran is one that is extremely worrying. Almost 70 years ago a charismatic leader of a nation was seen as using hyperbole when saying he would wipe out the Jews, while flexing military muscle in direct contradiction to the terms of treaties that Germany had signed. As the Sudatenland fell, the world did nothing. 65 years later a charismatic leader of a nation makes the same claim about the Jews (using much of the same language in describing them), flexes his might by developing a nuclear weapon in contempt of the treaty to which it is a signatory. If he threatened to wipe out all Christians, or even infidels, the reaction would be very different. J ‘accuse. The world does not see the threat.
Does the blame lie with Israel, or has Israel been painted into a corner? A country that fits into Tasmania 3 ½ times with a population of 5 million surrounded on 3 sides with 22 Arab states with a combined population of about 200 million. With the West Bank in the hands of the Palestinian Authority, Israel is 14 kilometres across at its narrowest point. This is right across the centre of the country, between the West Bank town of Tulkarem and Israel’s fourth border, the Mediterranean Sea. This is a country that has faced 4 multi-front wars and 2 less-fronted wars, 2 intifadas, 1 war of attrition and ongoing war of attrition up to today, is expected to make concessions.
Israel justifiably is a little worried about its security. No one else seems to be. Obama called on Israel to halt all settlements on the West Bank, without defining the terms, or even checking what had been agreed upon in the past. That call was further than any Palestinian leader had gone since their recognition of Israel. At best this was reckless and irresponsible and worst it could lead to armed conflict. Hamas declaring an up scaling of its conflict with Israel and Fatah considering a new Intifadah, a sure indication that they feel they have public sympathy.
An Israel, friendless, despite assurances this week commemorated Holocaust Memorial Day. It is a sharp reminder how the Jews were expendable. This week coming Israel will commemorate Remembrance Day for its fallen soldiers immediately followed by its Independence Day. All of these days interconnect not just historically, but more importantly they are interconnected in the collective Israeli psyche.
Can an Israel, with this psyche, attempt to bomb Iran nuclear plants? Yes. Should they? Well, I just say, they shouldn’t have to. To Obama I say do a bit of reading. Speak to people who know. You have people around you who have been there and done that. Dennis Ross is a good example. I am sad to admit that after 1 year in power Obama has reduced the trust between the 2 countries to zero.
No comments:
Post a Comment