Responses to U.S. President Barack Obama's June 4, 2009Cairo speech by Pakistani religious leaders, Pakistani and Afghan newspapers, the Kashmiri press, and the Taliban varied widely. The following are excerpts from numerous responses, as reported by Pakistani, Afghan, and Kashmir papers and by the Taliban website.
"Obama's Speech was Nothing But Hypocrisy - Since his Administration Has Been Waging Wars on Muslim Countries on a Number of Pretexts to Control Their Resources"
The Pakistani daily The News reported on statements by religious leaders in response to Obama's speech. [1] Syed Munawwar Hasan, the Emir of Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan, said: "Obama's speech was nothing but hypocrisy, since his administration has been waging wars on Muslim countries on a number of pretexts to control their resources. The U.S. has been at war with Islam, depriving Muslims of their freedom, fully backing the occupation of Muslim lands and massacre of Muslim men, women and children, which is exactly opposite to the friendly impression he tried to give. Washington is using every dirty tactic to control and destroy Islamabad's nuclear assets - but on the other hand is supporting the nuclear programs of Tel Aviv and Delhi."
Qazi Hussain Ahmad, the former chief of Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan, said: "Obama's stated commitment can only be materialized if Washington immediately pulled out its forces from Afghanistan and Iraq, and reversed policies denying freedom and fundamental rights to Muslims."
According to Dr. Hafiz Abdul Karim, secretary-general of Jamiat Ahle Hadith, "the basis of tension between Washington and Muslims was the unjust policies of America; without reversing these, global terrorism cannot be uprooted... Without giving fundamental rights to Muslims of Palestine and Kashmir, and pulling out NATO forces from Afghanistan and Iraq, no material change can be brought into global situation. Obama promoted the Zionists' cause by talking of the Holocaust and of Israel's right to exist; however, he ignored the occupation of Palestine and the massacre of refugees and the denying of all their fundamental rights - of which Washington boasts that it is a champion."
Liaquat Baloch, secretary-general of Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan, said: "The U.S. should volunteer its own disarmament of nuclear weapons, if it is sincere about global disarmament of nuclear arms."
"The U.S. President's Statement is a Hopeful Sign - However, Obama Should Announce a Plan to End Arms and American Bases Across the World"
The Urdu-language newspaper Roznama Jang also reported on statements on the speech by religious leaders. [2] Muhammad Sarwat Ejaz Qadri, a leader of the Karachi-based religious organization Sunni Tehreek, said: "The U.S. president's statement is a hopeful sign. However, Obama should announce a plan to end arms and American bases across the world; [he should] stop, on an emergency basis, the growing transfer of American weapons worldwide; and [he should also] stop the looting and burglary by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank."
Allama Abbas Kumaili, a Shi'ite scholar and leader of Jafria Alliance, said: "The U.S. President has spoken good words. However, the real issue is intention. The U.S. should put these words into practice."
Maulana Fazlur Rahman, leader of Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (part of the ruling coalition in Islamabad), said: "Obama's speech at Cairo University was positive.... If the U.S. makes its mission of world peace effective, it will improve the situation... use of power is not a solution to any problem..."
"Jihad is Not Terrorism - Rather, It Is the Only Means to Eradicate Injustice from the World... The U.S., Israel, and India are Eyeing Pakistan's Nuclear Program..."
As reported by the Pakistani daily The News, Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, the founder of militant organization Lashkar-e-Taiba and head of Jamaatud Dawa, delivered a sermon in Jamia Qadisia mosque in Lahore. [3] In the sermon, Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, who following the November 2008 Mumbai attacks had been under house arrest and was recently released by a court in Lahore, said: "Obama's aims were clear from the U.S. aggression in Afghanistan and Iraq, and from the drone attacks on Pakistan, which belied his references to the Koran and Sunnah and his mention of friendship with Muslim world...
"Peace would easily be established in the world if the U.S. and its allies stopped spilling Muslim blood and pulled out of Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, Kashmir and FATA [federally administered areas along the Afghan border].
"Jihad is not terrorism - rather, it is the only means to eradicate injustice from the world... The U.S., Israel, and India are eyeing Pakistan's nuclear program, and Islamabad [has] obtained proof of Indian involvement in Baluchistan, FATA, and Swat, but our rulers are afraid of accusing Delhi."
Daily Times: "The Man in the Street in Pakistan... Expected Nothing from President Obama Because America is an Enemy of Islam and Has Been an Unreliable Friend of Pakistan in Times of Need"
In an editorial, the Lahore-based Daily Times wrote: [4] "[O]ne has to assess President Obama's chances of getting his policy guided successfully through the U.S. Congress, where vested interests within American democracy have historically contested the authority of the president since President Woodrow Wilson's failure to join the League of Nations.
"The first objection to the speech came before it was made: Why did he have to go to a state run by a decrepit old dictator [Hosni Mubarak of Egypt], who has ruled for the past 30 years after winning dubious referendums with a yes-vote of over 90%?
"But the counter question is: Since the venue had to be in the Arab world, where else could he have gone, if the yardstick was to be democracy? Why can't one argue that it was right to deliver the message of democracy in the heart of a society that is struggling for democratic and human rights?
"There is little thinking behind the objection that since he had earlier addressed the Turkish parliament he should have done the same in Egypt. But surely by ignoring the Egyptian parliament, considered fake by most Egyptians, he simply gave point to his message.
"In Pakistan, most commentators rejected the speech out of hand, saying it was just words and no action - and that some action should have come before the speech. These objections became more pointed after Al-Qaeda's consistent rejection of President Obama's announced policy in Afghanistan and Osama bin Laden's fatwa-like statement that Muslims should neither parley nor ally with 'infidel' Christians and Jews.
"A number of 'experts' on the TV channels were reluctant to support any similar 'verbal' softening of the anti-American worldview on the part of the Muslims, sending out the signal that President Obama will have to go it alone while the Muslim world stands aside and judges his performance. The man in the street in Pakistan told the TV channels that he expected nothing from President Obama because America is an enemy of Islam and has been an unreliable friend of Pakistan in times of need.
"President Obama's references to Islam and his quotations from the Koran were cheered by the audience at Cairo University. Some pointed references to democracy and women's rights were welcomed with equal enthusiasm - which reflected neither the views of the Mubarak government nor those of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is sure to win a fair election in Egypt. Those who cheered therefore wanted the removal of dictatorship, while being sceptical of democracy under the influential Egyptian Islamists. This brings up the question of the prospects of democracy in the Muslim world, and complicates the mission of President Obama as he applies the yardstick of democracy to American policy toward the Muslim world.
"President Obama's reference to Israel has raised needless hackles in some quarters. He said: 'America's strong bonds with Israel are well-known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied.' This is simply the baseline from which America will proceed because that is what the American public opinion dictates. His strong objection to Israeli settlements on Palestinian lands also comes from the position taken by earlier administrations, the only difference being his determination to actualize what has been said repeatedly in the past. President Obama's May 18 meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was followed by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's insistence that the Netanyahu government end residential building for Israelis in the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem. Israel reacted furiously, one minister comparing Obama to a pharaoh.
"There are many things in the carefully drafted speech that catch attention, but if President Barack Obama delivers on his plan to stop and roll back the settlements - Israelis say they are negotiable at the time of the formation of the new state - and facilitates the creation of the U.N.-backed state for the Palestinians in two years, he will have ushered in a new paradigm of relations between the Muslims and the United States."
Roznama Jang: "This Reality Should be Stressed - That Unless Disputes Such as Palestine And Kashmir are Resolved Justly, The Reaction of it Among Youth Will be Reflected in The Form of Extremism, Militancy and Militant-Like Behavior"
The Urdu-language Roznama Jang wrote in an editorial: [5] "The expectation is not unrealistic that President Obama's meetings with Saudi and Egyptian leaders and speech to the Muslim world can be made a basis of dialogue with the Muslims of the world. The Muslim nations therefore should together prepare for such this. Through a joint strategy, they should effectively decide these parameters under which relations with Washington can be maintained while protecting our community's respect and honor; in the light of these parameters, clear talks should be held with President Barack Hussein Obama.
"Stressing upon him the need and importance of the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan and Iraq, a plan of action should be presented before the White House. Although the flaws of the U.S. policies adopted after 9/11 are reflected in the statements of the American leadership, yet it is necessary to clearly... tell them that problems are not resolved through the use of force.
"This reality should be stressed that unless disputes such as Palestine and Kashmir are resolved justly, the reaction of it among youth will be reflected in the form of extremism, militancy and militant-like behavior."
Dawn: "The... Issue That Can Undo Mr. Obama's Effort to Reach Out to The Muslim World is Iran's Pursuit of Nuclear Weapons"
The Pakistani daily Dawn wrote in an editorial: [6] "How did President Obama fare? The president began by reaching back into history, touching upon the contributions of Arabs to modern science, the early ties between the U.S. and Muslim countries (Morocco was the first country to recognize the U.S. in 1796, Mr. Obama said), and the splendour of Muslim art, architecture and poetry. The president also thrice referred to passages from the Holy Koran, and flagged his family's Muslim roots and his time spent on three continents engaging with Muslims. But such speeches are also about policy and for all the talk of common bonds and shared histories, what matters most to improving the U.S.'s standing in the Muslim world is what it does going forward - a fact Mr Obama acknowledged frankly.
"The president spelled out seven specific issues on which tension between the Muslim world and the U.S. needs to be addressed. The first, unsurprisingly, was the need to 'confront violent extremism in all its forms.' The president was categorical and zeroed in on Al-Qaeda as the pre-eminent threat... to American security. So, even while he spoke of his desire to see all Americans troops leave Iraq by 2012 and Afghanistan at the earliest and having no intention to seek military bases in either country, his message was clear: the U.S. will do what is necessary to protect its security, though he acknowledged it involved more than just a military strategy in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
"If the first issue preoccupies the Americans more than the Muslim world, the reverse is true for the next issue President Obama touched upon: the Israeli-Palestinian issue. The effect the close bond between Israel and the U.S. (termed 'unbreakable' by Mr. Obama) has on promoting militancy may be debatable, but there is little doubt that Israel's occupation of Palestinian lands is a rallying cry for disaffected Muslims the world over. Mr. Obama firmly backed the right of Palestinians to their own state and rejected the legitimacy of 'continued Israeli settlements in the West Bank,' but his strong support for the Palestinians will not have gone down well with the hawkish Israeli government. Therein lies the problem: There is little leverage that the Americans have - or are willing to use - against a belligerent Israeli government. If the Israelis continue to try and expand the settlements, nothing will placate its Arab neighbors or the Muslim world - rendering Mr Obama's words to them empty rhetoric.
"The other issue that can undo Mr. Obama's effort to reach out to the Muslim world is Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons. No doubt few of Iran's Muslim neighbors will be comfortable with it acquiring nuclear weapons. At the same time, however, the issue is mired in a deep sense of resentment and unfairness: the U.S. has nuclear weapons but it doesn't want other countries - read Muslim countries - to have the same capability goes the argument. How the Obama administration treads that tightrope will determine who wins the psychological battle for Muslim hearts and minds.
"For the rest, President Obama tried to restate the U.S.'s normative approach to relations with the Muslim world. Democracy will be supported, but it will not be 'imposed.' Religious freedom, women's rights, and economic development will be promoted and defended by the Obama administration. Indeed, it was a sweeping message that tried to show a softer, gentler side of the U.S., one that emphasized similarities and opportunities and not divisions with the Muslim world...."
Taliban Website: "Obama Wants to Create Rifts Among Muslims With Such Statements and Speeches - And To Distance Muslims From the Mujahideen… All the Muslims Have Joined Jihad"
The Taliban website www.alemarah.org commented on Obama's speech, stating: [7] "Obama is making the claim of cordial relations with Muslim in a situation when the U.S. occupation forces have been continuing the mass killing of Muslims, torturing prisoners and killing those who are defending their rights...
"Obama justified the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq and the interests of U.S., but international law does not allow the capturing of an independent country or justify brutal war on the people of these countries..."
"Obama wants to create rifts among Muslims with such statements and speeches, and to distance Muslims from the Mujahideen. All the Muslims have joined jihad... and they consider the U.S. war against mujahideen as against the entire Muslim world..."
Kashmiri Leaders Welcome Speech
Yasin Malik, the chairman of the secessionist organization Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front, welcomed President Barack Obama’s Cairo speech. According to Kashmiri websites, he said that recent steps taken by President Obama have worked well to bridge the gulf created between America and the Muslim world after 9/11. He added: "America’s new policy will restore peace and order in the world."
Mohammad Azam Inquilabi, a former militant commander, wrote a letter of appreciation to Obama, urging him to facilitate world peace by resolving the Kashmir issue. He said that in his speech, Obama did not mention two words, "terrorism" and "Kashmir." He wrote in the letter: "It is time to empower the enslaved and humiliated people of Kashmir, Palestine, Iraq, and Afghanistan, and to shun the desultory and myopic approach to global issues." [8] (8)
Mujahid Weekly: Unlike Bush, "Obama Did Not Use the Terrorism Word in His Cairo Speech"
Following are excerpts from an editorial in the Dari-language weekly Mujahid: [9] "President Barak Obama's Cairo speech was very much positive and a clear signal for peace in the world...
"After the 9/11 attacks, former U.S. president George W. Bush started a number of conflicts in the Islamic countries like Iraq and Afghanistan, which were counted as the direct war from America against Islam, and for this reason not only Al-Qaeda but almost all Muslims started hating Americans...."
"Obama did not use the terrorism word in his Cairo speech, and this word was placed in almost every sentence of Bush....
"It seems that the reaction of the Muslim world to Obama's speech would be positive...
Endnotes:
[1] The News, Pakistan, June 5, 2009.
[2] Roznama Jang, Pakistan, June 5, 2009.
[3] The News, Pakistan, June 6, 2009.
[4] Daily Times, Pakistan, June 6, 2009.
[5] Roznama Jang, Pakistan, June 5, 2009.
[6] Dawn, Pakistan, June 5, 2009.
[7] www.alemarah1.org, Afghanistan, June 5, 2009.
[8] Greater Kashmir, India, June 7, 2009; www.risingkashmir.com, India, June 7, 2009.
[9] Mujahid, Afghanistan, Vol. 11, June 6, 2009.
