On January 19, 2011 Russian President Dmitry Medvedev stressed during a visit to the West Bank that Moscow recognized an independent Palestinian state in 1988 and is not changing that position. Speaking at a news conference with Palestinian President Mahmud Abbas in Jericho, Medvedev said: "We made our decision then and we have not changed it today."
U.S. policy is to oppose the unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state, to withhold diplomatic recognition of any Palestinian state that is unilaterally declared, and to encourage other countries and international organizations to withhold diplomatic recognition of any Palestinian state that is unilaterally declared.
To borrow Robert Fisk, renowned journalist, Obama's speech was "the same old story... Israel cannot be deligitimised... No peace can be imposed on either party... It sounded like his pro-Israeli speech to AIPAC."
Arab disappointment with Obama's "reset policy" is best reflected in the comment by a Beirut student Anthony Haddad: " Obama's rhetoric won't consistently be met with action. " Obama's rhetoric only has teeth where America's unchanged interests lie. [Even with insisting on] 1967 borders " a strong-willed speech from Obama without the will to twist a few Israeli arms along the way will do nothing to fix the Israeli-Palestinian question."
According to Nick Turse, the associate editor of TimDispatch.com, all signs indicate that the Pentagon will quietly maintain antithetical policies, just as it has throughout the Obama years. Barring an unprecedented and almost inconceivable policy shift, it will continue to broker lucrative deals to send weapons systems and military equipment to Arab despots. Nothing indicates that it will be deterred from its course, whatever the president says, which means that Barack Obama's reset rhetoric is unlikely to translate into meaningful policy change in the region.
Jeff Mason of Reuters believes it was Obama's election campaign speech:
"It may not have been a campaign speech, but President Barack Obama's foreign policy address on Thursday sent a series of political messages that could resonate in his 2012 race to retain the White House. Standing in front of a row of American flags at the State Department, Obama directed his comments on U.S. policy to populations throughout the Middle East and North Africa, offering economic and political support for democratic reform. But the president had another target audience: voters at home. By spelling out U.S. positions on the war in Libya, violence in Syria, and roadblocks in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, Obama addressed specific interest groups and crucial independent voters who use foreign policy as a criteria at the ballot box. Obama also bolstered his case for being a strong leader by citing the successful operation to kill al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden."
Why the world's Muslims are so mad at America?
President Obama spoke at a time when U.S. influence in the region is at an all-time low in modern history.
A new PEW survey, released two days prior to Obama's speech, finds that the rise of pro-democracy movements has not led to an improvement in America's image in the region. Instead, in key Arab nations and in other predominantly Muslim countries, views of the U.S. remain negative, as they have been for nearly a decade. Indeed, in Jordan, Turkey and Pakistan, views are even more negative than they were one year ago.
With the exception of Indonesia, Obama remains unpopular in the Muslim nations polled, and most disapprove of the way he has handled calls for political change roiling the Middle East. Moreover, many of the concerns that have driven animosity toward the U.S. in recent years are still present -- a perception that the U.S. acts unilaterally, opposition to the war on terror, and fears of America as a military threat. And in countries such as Jordan, Lebanon, and Pakistan, most say their own governments cooperate too much with the U.S.
As Obama
tries to "reset" relations with a Muslim world another survey released on
Wednesday highlighted one of the most fundamental questions about U.S. involvement
there.
Why are
Muslims, by and large, so mad at America?
The survey
published in the form of a new book Feeling Betrayed: The Roots of Muslim Anger
at America,
reflecting five years of research on the ground by political psychologist
Steven Kull, suggests a pair of startling explanations. Kull performed polls
and focus groups throughout the Middle East, North Africa and the Asian Pacific
from 2006-2010.
"Out of this process, we identified a widespread Muslim narrative of why they are mad at America," he said, presenting his findings Wednesday at the Brookings Institution.
"It was
really striking to me how common this was. All the way from Morocco to Indonesia, they were singing off
the same song sheet. The closer you get to the Middle East,
there's more intensity, but the themes are really very much the same."
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
