No magic wand, but we can dream

Doaa El-Bey looks at the expectations and possible results of Obama's Cairo address

---

Tariq Al-Homayed wrote that Obama's visit has come at a time when the Arab world is in a state of utter division and disability. Thus, the Middle East media and public are providing him with a list of requests: the return of Palestinian land and the Golan Heights; stopping the Iranian nuclear programme without waging a war against or giving Tehran concessions, and preferably without dialogue with Iran's religious leaders; and withdrawing from Iraq without leaving it prey in the hands of the Iranians.

In the meantime, we did not hear anything about what the Arabs are willing to do in return. That is, as Homayed added, how about if Obama told the Arabs that he would do all what he could to achieve peace in return for one thing, ending Palestinian divisions? Could the Arabs live with that?

"Obama will address the Arab and Islamic world, however, he does not have a magic wand to solve all the problems. He faces an extremist Israeli government, Arab states that are engaged in regional conflicts, and groups like Hamas and Hizbullah who are not interested in peace," Al-Homayed wrote in the London- based political daily Asharq Al-Awsat.

Abdel-Rahman Al-Rashed did not agree with Al-Homayed, betting that Obama was not only capable of changing the picture of the US but also of the Middle East for the better. An impossible mission it may appear, but he has already taken the first step towards achieving it. Now the majority of Arabs look positively on the US president.

In fact Obama is not supposed to satisfy 300 million Arabs or resolve all Middle East issues, but he can focus on one issue: the Arab-Israeli conflict. If he manages to resolve this he will achieve three targets: peace and security for Israel for the first time; an end to the injustice that has lasted for more than 50 years, and an end to all excuses for hating the US.

Al-Rashed regarded the fact that the Arabs trust Obama as the leader capable of resolving the Middle East conflict as a complete change in their political stand. They used to regard the US as biased towards Israel, mistrusted its mediation and called for the participation of Europe and Russia.

"At present, the Arabs trust the US thanks to Obama, who persuaded them that he is an unbiased leader in issues like a Palestinian issue, and a fair leader in dealing with Guantanamo prisoners. He proved that he is not hostile to the region because he addressed the Islamic world as soon as he became president," Al-Rashed wrote in Asharq Al-Awsat.

Nasser Al-Sarami wrote that Obama has shown clear interest in the Islamic world since coming to the White House. He is also the US president who has received the greatest number of messages from Islamic parties and organisations in addition to thousands of newspaper articles directly addressed to him.

That, according to Al-Sarami, indicated he is not only enjoying widespread popularity in the US and Europe but in the Arab and Islamic worlds as well.

"The Cairo speech should outline US policy especially after the first 100 days of Obama's presidency have passed and as he has become involved in new challenges that he is handling with unexpected efficiency, as the US media declares. We hope he will deal with peace and dissolve the so-called clash of civilisations with the same efficiency," Al-Sarami concluded in the Saudi daily Al-Jazirah.

Hassan Ezzeddin called for giving Obama the chance to show his good faith. Obama, so far, proved that he is different from his predecessor in dealing with controversial issues. Thus he is required to be different in dealing with pressing issues that threaten world security. The Arab- Israeli conflict is not a conventional conflict between the Hebrew state and some fedayeen calling for liberty. it now represents a comprehensive international conflict between two doctrines: the first espouses occupation, power and military thinking and the second is entirely hostile to the first. If the former manages to achieve international support, the latter will still prove to be the more acceptable option to many parties worldwide.

Thus it is very important to present our issue in a clear way, away from the various strategic interests that the previous US administrations have considered in the past.

"It is not enough that Obama requests the establishment of a Palestinian state from a podium, but he should work hard to establish it. It is not a gift from him, but a basic and strategic right to the Palestinians," Ezzeddin wrote in the United Arab Emirates daily Al-Bayan .

Omar Helmi Al-Ghoul looked at the recent US language, noticing that there has been a gradual change in terms by observing US political language. That change included Obama, his State Secretary Hillary Clinton and special envoy to the Middle East George Mitchell, in addition to all those linked to the present administration and even to the Zionist lobby and some Republicans.

That change is most noticeable in the language used in resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict and is mostly presented in the US rejection of more Israeli settlements and its insistence on a two state-solution according to the roadmap and the Arab peace initiative.

As proof of his argument, Al-Ghoul published excerpts from an interview with Martin Indyk, Mitchell's counsellor and a prominent expert in the Obama administration. Indyk said, "the Arab-Israeli conflict became a weapon in the hands of our enemy... any attempt to waste time is not in the interest of Israel or peace... Israel lost many opportunities for peace and it has to seize the present available opportunity... Netanyahu's claim that engaging in a peace process would lead to dissolving the current coalition government is not right." Indyk reached the conclusion that Israel is suffering from a complex: on the one hand it feels that it is a strong state but on the other, it feels isolated and weak.

Al-Ghoul concluded in the Palestinian political daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida that the picture Indyk drew about Israel reflects the relative change in US language as well as the conviction that an Israeli settlement with the Arabs or the Palestinians is in the interest of both the US and Israel.