Obama pivots away from this ‘unfixable’ region

James Zogby revisits the promise of Barak Obama's 2009 speech in Cairo

Men watch a live broadcast of a speech delivered in Cairo by US president Barrack Obama, in Baghdad in 2009. Ahmed Al Rubaye / AFP

Last month The Atlantic magazine featured a cover story, The Obama Doctrine, written by Jeffrey Goldberg. Based on many hours of interviews with Barack Obama, it represents an attempt to understand the president’s overall foreign policy. It was both disappointing and damaging. It was disappointing in that it presents a US president who appears to have given up on delivering on the promise of his 2009 Cairo speech. He has resigned himself to an “unfixable” Middle East and “thrown in the towel”.

At the same time, the article is damaging in that the US president is quoted saying things that are deeply insulting to Arabs. Mr Obama emerges from the article as condescending and dismissive. I understand that there is much in the piece that is Goldberg and not Mr Obama, but there are still enough direct quotes that are deeply troubling. One, in particular, stands out for its anti-Arab animus: “Contrast [the Middle East] with South East Asia, which still has huge problems ... but is filled with striving, ambitious, energetic people ... the contrast is stark. They are not thinking about how to kill Americans. What they’re thinking about is ‘how do I get a better education? How do I create something of value?”

Not only does the quote ignore the recent bloody history of repression practised by several countries in South East Asia, it also slights the dynamic entrepreneurial spirit that is driving economic growth and social change across the Arab world. The comments sounded more like something Donald Trump might have said.

Admittedly, this US president began his term in office facing a greater set of challenges than any of his immediate predecessors. The country faced the greatest economic crisis since the 1930s. Not only that, but after two failed wars and the Bush administration’s disastrous handling of Hurricane Katrina, Americans were facing a crisis in confidence. Similarly, American prestige around the world had plummeted to all-time lows. And to make matters worse, politics in Washington had become toxic, with Republicans determined to defeat the president’s every effort to address the country’s crises.

Facing down these overwhelming challenges, the new President Obama projected hope and optimism. Working with the Democratic leadership in Congress he moved a series of measures designed to rescue critical industries, stabilise financial institutions, stimulate the economy, expand health care coverage and create new employment opportunities.

In an effort to address the grave challenges America faced in the Middle East, Mr Obama took a number of steps and then travelled to Cairo where he delivered an historic address promising “a new beginning” in the US-Arab relationship. It was a remarkable speech that admitted shared responsibility, called for mutual understanding, presented a constructive agenda for change and closed with Mr Obama acknowledging that because “no single speech can eradicate years of mistrust” it was imperative that bold action be taken quickly.

The Arab world responded positively, hoping Mr Obama would deliver. His opponents at home immediately attacked him, pledging to derail his efforts to change course on Iraq, Guantanamo, Israel-Palestine and improving ties with Muslim countries – and they did.

Seven years later, the promise of that Cairo speech remains unfulfilled. The reasons for the failure are many – some, though not all, of which can be planted at the feet of the Arab world. There were others.

Israeli intransigence blocked any reasonable effort to move towards peace. The Palestinian leadership, so weakened, deformed and discredited by the US and Israel’s mishandling of the so-called “peace process”, was unable to play the role it was unfairly asked to assume. The Arab Spring created new uncertainty in the region. The US military, eviscerated by the demoralising wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, was reeling in exhaustion. And poisonous partisan domestic politics made it difficult for the US president to find the support he needed. All of this is lost in Goldberg’s Obama Doctrine. Rewriting history, the Cairo speech is presented as an effort “to persuade Muslims to more closely examine the roots of their unhappiness”. Those were Goldberg’s words, but they were followed by this quote from Mr Obama: “My argument was this: let’s all stop pretending that the cause of the Middle East’s problems is Israel”. True enough, but if the US couldn’t live up to its responsibility in this “new beginning”, it is surely unbecoming to place the blame at the Arabs’ doorstep.

The US president still has nine months to deliver on the expectations he created. He can take bold initiatives: support a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East; recognise Palestinian sovereignty and statehood and take steps to rein in Iran and create a regional security framework. I hope he does, because it would be sad if the epitaph describing his administration’s Middle East policy were to end up being “From Cairo to Goldberg”.

Dr James Zogby is the president of the Arab American Institute

On Twitter: @aaiusa