It will not be enough for...Obama to...say... that he understands... and sympathizes with [Muslims], as they too are the victims of the terrorism of extremists...Most Muslims will listen carefully to what he will say on June 4, and they are expecting clear steps for a radical solution to the Palestinian issue, as a fundamental key to restoring trust in the United States.
—Raghida Dereham
Candor requires acknowledging that too many Arab states have exploited the Arab-Israeli conflict for domestic purposes. These regimes have used the conflict to deflect criticism of... their failings...Taken together, instead of producing a culture of responsibility, as President Obama has called for at home, they perpetuate a culture of victimhood.
—David Makovksy
June 4 is D-Day for President Obama. Standing before an audience of millions, he must deliver a speech that will confront Muslims, Christians and Jews with a view of the future that transcends long held positions in favor of a vision that is as bold as it is realistic.
To get a sense of the challenges, consider the above two statements. Dergham holds that resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is the sine qua non for "restoring trust" between Muslims and the U.S. Makovsky deflects this assertion, insisting that Arab autocrats have used the conflict to cover their own failings, thus sustaining "a culture of victimhood."
These are not necessarily mutually opposed positions. The problem is that by trotting out these well-worn verities, Arabs and Israelis have both avoided confronting larger truths.
Israelis do not grasp the escalating significance of the Arab-Israeli dispute in the everyday lives of Muslims. In villages of East Java and other once remote corners of the Muslim world, young people watch this conflict play out live on their living room TVs. When they see satellite images of Palestinian homes being destroyed in East Jerusalem, or of wounded children in Gaza, who can blame them for concluding that Palestinians are victims?
Indeed, Palestinians are victims. They are the victims of inept leaders, of cynical Arab "supporters," and last but not least, of an Israeli settlement policy that has virtually precluded the creation of a viable Palestinian state. When Obama criticizes Israeli settlement policy, he is neither unfairly assailing Israelis nor excusing Palestinian terrorism. Instead, he is challenging Israelis to take responsibility for their own actions, rather than continue the cries of "victimhood" that Makovsky seems to attribute solely to the Arabs.
That said, the risk that Obama runs in prioritizing the Arab-Israeli conflict above all other issues is not merely that it could play into the survival tactics of Arab leaders. This strategy could also accentuate the one issue that has repeatedly distracted Arab opposition activists from tackling pressing domestic political and social issues.
These activists are far more likely to agree on resistance to this or that Israeli action than they are to define a shared vision of their political future. Unless Arab opposition leaders find common ground, they will never devise a strategy for confronting the efforts of Arab leaders to avoid the challenges of democratization. Instead, they will retreat into a culture of victimhood that is far more complicated than even Makovksy suggests.
Each party to the conflict would like the U.S. to focus on the other's victimization problem. But the U.S. can no longer afford being the Great Enabler. Rather, Obama's greatest challenge is to clearly tell his millions of Muslim and non-Muslim viewers that the tasks of domestic political reform and regional peace making are equally important and inextricably bound together.
Obama must clearly state that in pushing resolutely for Arab-Israeli peace, the White House is not giving a blank check to Arab autocrats. On the contrary, it is helping Arab leaders and their oppositions clear the path for genuine political reform. And he must tell Israel and its supporters that they cannot use the failings of Arab leaders to alter "the facts on the ground," or to avoid the difficult compromises required for Palestinian-Israeli peace.
It is never too late for political leaders to grow up. And it is good to have a president who can dispense with excuses and encourage a culture of responsibility.
Daniel Brumberg is an associate professor of government and director of democracy and governance studies at Georgetown University. He is also a senior nonresident fellow at the Project on Middle East Democracy. His work focuses on political, social and economic change in the Middle East and wider Muslim World.
