TRẦN BÌNH NAM * CHÍNH LUẬN

DIỄN VĂN TỔNG THỐNG OBAMA ĐỌC TẠI AI CẬP

Dù muốn dù không, chuyến du hành của tổng thống Obama đến Saudi Arabia và bài diễn văn ông đọc tại đại học Cairo, Ai Cập ngày 4/6/2009 là một điểm mốc quan trọng trong quan hệ giữa thế giới Tây phương và thế giới Hồi giáo.

Không một tổng thống Hoa Kỳ nào trước tổng thống Obama có tư thế để hành động như vậy. Trong thời gian tranh cử, tổng thống Obama xác định một chính sách hòa giải dứt khoát với thế giới Hồi giáo và đường lối đó đã được dân chúng Hoa Kỳ cũng như nhân dân các nước đồng minh Âu châu nhiệt liệt ủng hộ, và nhờ đó đã đưa ông, người Mỹ da đen gốc Phi châu đầu tiên vào tòa Bạch Ốc.

Trong bài diễn văn tổng thống Obama không ngại ngùng nói đến vấn đề đen trắng như một cái gương dân chủ của Hoa Kỳ để làm bàn đạp cho tư tưởng hòa giải của ông. Ông nói “Sự việc một người da đen gốc Phi châu có cái tên lạ tai là Barack Hussein Obama có thể đắc cử tổng thống Hoa Kỳ đã nói lên tất cả” (Trích diễn văn:
Now, much has been made of the fact that an African American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected President (1) Đó là lý do các nước Hồi giáo đã chờ đợi bài diễn văn của tổng thống Obama một cách khác thường, nghi ngờ lẫn hy vọng, trong khi các nước đồng minh Tây phương và thế giới nói chung chờ đợi nó một cách vừa hy vọng vừa lo âu.

Bài diễn văn của tổng thống Obama nêu ra bảy vấn đề trong quan hệ giữa thế giới nói chung và Hoa kỳ nói riêng với thế giới Hồi giáo.

Trước hết là vấn đề khủng bố khởi đầu với vụ khủng bố ngày 11 tháng 9 năm 2001 mà kết quả là cuộc chiến Iraq và Afghanistan (và đang lan qua Pakistan) hiện nay và ông đang giải quyết trong tinh thần giải kết.

Tổng thống Obama xác định sau vụ 911 Hoa Kỳ không có lựa chọn nào khác hơn là tấn công Afghanistan lật đổ chế độ Taliban tại đó vì đã dung dưỡng quân khủng bố giết gần 3000 người Mỹ, nhưng với Iraq Hoa Kỳ có sự chọn lựa và đã chọn chiến tranh. Nhưng Hoa Kỳ đã có chương trình giải kết khỏi cuộc chiến này. Hoa Kỳ sẽ rút hết quân ra khỏi các thành phố của Iraq vào tháng 7 năm nay và rút toàn bộ quân đội Hoa Kỳ chậm lắm là vào năm 2012.

Tại Afghanistan (và Pakistan) tổng thống Obama xác định Hoa Kỳ không có ý định duy trì căn cứ quân sự vĩnh viễn tại đó và rằng sức mạnh quân sự sẽ không giải quyết vấn đề (nên Hoa Kỳ không đi tìm một chiến thắng quân sự) mà tìm giải pháp qua đường lối giúp phát triển kinh tế. Hoa Kỳ sẽ đầu tư tại Pakistan mỗi năm 1.5 tỉ mỹ kim trong 5 năm tới để xây trường học, đường sá, bệnh viện … và viện trợ kinh tế cho Afghanistan 2.8 tỉ mỹ kim.

Vấn đề thứ hai là sự căng thẳng tiềm tàng do cuộc chiến tranh Do thái – Palestine. Tổng thống Obama nói vấn đề Do thái – Palestine chỉ có thể giải quyết qua công thức hai quốc gia công nhận nhau và cùng tồn tại bên cạnh nhau. Và điều này phục vụ quyền lợi của Do thái, quyền lợi của Palestine, của Hoa Kỳ và của thế giới nói chung. (Trích diễn văn: The only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security. That is in Israel’s interest, Palestine’s interest, America’s interest, and the world’s interest…) Tuy nhiên tổng thống Obama không có giải pháp hành động nào hơn là hứa sẽ kiên nhẫn và khéo léo để thực hiện (Trích diễn văn: And that is why I intend to personally pursue this outcome with all the patience and dedication that the task requires.) Lĩnh vực thứ ba là vấn đề nguyên tử của Iran mà tổng thống nói một cách văn hoa là vấn đề san sẻ trách nhiệm về quyền sở đắc vũ khí nguyên tử (Trích diễn văn: The third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons.) Tổng thống Obama can đảm và thẳng thắn nhìn nhận rằng mối xung khắc giữa hai nước khởi đầu với việc Hoa Kỳ lật đổ chính phủ dân cử của Iran trong thời gian còn cuộc chiến tranh lạnh. Sau đó là cuộc cách mạng Hồi giáo của giáo chủ Komeini, và Iran bắt giữ toàn bộ nhân sự của tòa đại sứ Hoa Kỳ ở Teheran làm con tin (Trích diễn văn: In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government. Since the

Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostagetaking and violence against U.S. troops and

civilians.) Tuy nhiên vấn đề chính trước mắt là vấn đề Iran định tâm chế tạo vũ khí nguyên tử. Ông khéo léo nói rằng Hoa Kỳ quan tâm không phải vì quyền lợi của Hoa Kỳ mà vì Hoa Kỳ lo ngại nếu Iran có vũ khí nguyên tử sẽ tạo ra một cuộc chạy đua vũ trang tại Trung đông đe dọa hòa bình trong vùng và thế giới (Trích diễn văn: But it is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America’s interests. It’s about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path.)

Tổng thống Obama nêu ra một điểm từ trước đến nay vị tổng thống Hoa Kỳ nào cũng né tránh là câu hỏi hiển nhiên: “tại sao nước này có bom nguyên tử mà nước khác không có quyền có bom nguyên tử?”, và ông quả quyết rằng “không có nước nào trên thế giới có quyền chỉ định nước nào có quyền có bom nguyên tử nước nào không” để tỏ sự thông cảm với Iran. (Trích diễn văn: I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nation holds nuclear weapons.) Nhưng chỉ có thế! Ông Obama không có câu trả lời. Vấn đề thứ tư là “dân chủ”. Đây là vấn đề không riêng cho thế giới Tây phương và thế giới Hồi giáo mà còn liên hệ đến các chế độ độc tài khác trên thế giới. Tổng thống Obama nói nhiều năm qua người ta thích diễn dịch một cách nhầm lẫn rằng chiến tranh tại Iraq là để thực hiện dân chủ. Ông xác định lập trường của Hoa Kỳ về dân chủ một cách minh bạch rằng: “Không một nước nào có quyền áp đặt một thể chế chính trị cho một quốc gia khác, tuy nhiên Hoa Kỳ chủ trương chính thể chính trị phải thể hiện ý muốn của dân dù cách thể hiện ý muốn này có thể khác nhau tùy theo phong tục tập quán của từng dân tộc. Hoa Kỳ không thể xác định cách chọn nào thì tốt cho quốc gia nào, và cũng không thể quả quyết ai hay đảng nào mới xứng đáng được chọn lựa. Tuy nhiên ông Obama tin tưởng rằng cách chọn nào cũng không nên cướp quyền chọn lựa của người dân bằng bầu cử bịp bợm thiếu trong sáng và dân phải được quyền sống theo ý muốn của mình trong luật lệ. Đó không phải là tư tưởng của người Mỹ. Đó là tư tưởng phổ biến của thế giới: Đó là Nhân Quyền (Trích diễn văn: The fourth issue that I will address is democracy. I know — I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: No system of government can or should be imposed by one nation by any other. That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal
administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn’t steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. These are not just American ideas; they are human rights. ) Tổng thống Obama nói có một số người chỉ nói đến dân chủ khi đã rời khỏi quyền lực, còn khi đang nắm quyền lực trong tay thì làm mọi cách cấm cản quyền tự do của người khác. Người cầm quyền phải hiểu rằng sự cầm quyền của họ chỉ có giá trị khi họ duy trì nó qua đồng thuận chứ không phải qua mánh mung chính trị, và khi cầm quyền cần đặt quyền lợi của dân tộc lên trên quyền lợi của đảng phái. Thiếu những yếu tính đó, thì dù có bầu cử vẫn không có dân chủ. (Trích diễn văn: … there are some who advocate for democracy only when they’re out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. So no matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who would hold power: You must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy.) Điểm thứ năm tổng thống Obama bàn đến là sự xung khắc tôn giáo. Ông chủ trương tôn giáo đồng hành, giữa tôn giáo này với tôn giáo khác, giữa những nhánh khác biệt trong cùng một tôn giáo (thí dụ giữa Tin Lành và Thiên chúa giáo, giữa Sunni và Shia). Ông ghi nhận sự bất thường sinh ra xung khắc khi Hồi giáo cho ai khác tôn giáo mình là tà, và một số nước Âu châu cũng quá khích khi thông qua luật không cho người phụ nữ Hồi giáo mặc áo che kín cả mặt mày thân thể, và ông cũng chỉ trích luật làm khó khăn cho các cơ sở Hồi giáo gây quỹ để bành trướng tôn giáo mình tại Hoa Kỳ.(Trích diễn văn: Among some Muslims, there’s a disturbing tendency to measure one’s own faith by the rejection of somebody else’s faith. The richness of religious diversity must be upheld – whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. And if we are being honest, fault lines must be closed among Muslims, as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq. Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live together. We must always examine the ways in which we protect it. For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation.) Điểm xung khắc thứ sáu là cách đối đãi với phụ nữ. Ông nói thật là phi lý khi một số người tại các nước Tây phương cho rằng phụ nữ trùm khăn che tóc là làm mất quyền bình đẳng của mình. Nhưng ông tin rằng nếu không cho người phụ nữ đi học thì quả là bất bình đẳng. Ông nhận xét rằng nước nào phụ nữ được học hành và làm việc như đàn ông nước đó tiến bộ hơn. (Trích diễn văn: The sixth issue that I want to address is women’s rights. I know and you can tell from this audience, that there is a healthy debate about this issue. I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well educated are far more likely to be prosperous.) Sau cùng tổng thống Obama nêu triển vọng hợp tác giúp đỡ phát triển kinh tế và giáo dục với thế giới Hồi giáo. Về giáo dục ông đề nghị chương trình trao đổi sinh viên như chương trình phụ thân ông từng được hưởng. (Trích diễn văn: On education, we will expand exchange programs, and increase scholarships, like the one that brought my father to America.) Về kinh tế ông đề nghị thành lập một khối người tự nguyện đến các nước Hồi giáo kém mở mang để huấn luyện về quản lý kinh tế. Ông sẽ triệu tập trong năm 2009 này một hội nghị giữa các nhà kinh doanh Hoa Kỳ và Hồi giáo trên thế giới để trao đổi kinh nghiệm làm ăn. (Trích diễn văn: On economic development, we will create a new corps of business volunteers to partner with counterparts in Muslim-majority countries. And I will host a Summit on Entrepreneurship this year to identify how we can deepen ties between business leaders, foundations and social entrepreneurs in the United States and Muslim communities around the world.) Về khoa học kỹ thuật, Hoa Kỳ sẽ cung cấp ngân khoản thành lập các trung tâm trao đổi kỹ thuật tại Phi châu, Trung đông và Đông Nam Á để giúp các nước Hồi giáo phát triển năng lượng, tạo công ăn việc làm, lọc nước uống, tăng phúc lợi của mùa màng, diệt trừ bệnh tật, bảo toàn sức khỏe của người mẹ và trẻ sơ sinh . (Trích diễn văn: On science and technology, we will launch a new fund to support technological development in Muslim-majority countries, and to help transfer ideas to the marketplace so they can create more jobs. We’ll open centers of scientific excellence in Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia, and appoint new science envoys to collaborate on programs that develop new sources of energy, create green jobs, digitize records, clean water, grow new crops. Today I’m announcing a new global effort with the Organization of the Islamic Conference to eradicate polio. And we will also expand partnerships with Muslim communities to promote child and maternal health.) Qua bảy lĩnh vực trong quan hệ giữa Hoa Kỳ, thế giới Tây phương và thế giới Hồi giáo tổng thống Obama đã rất thẳng thắn đặt vấn đề xung khắc trước mắt mọi người và cũng không do dự nêu ra những sai lầm trong chính sách của Hoa Kỳ góp phần tạo nên sự căng thẳng hiện nay. Tuy nhiên những người quan tâm, đặc biệt tại các nước Hồi giáo, nếu đặt câu hỏi: “Tổng

thống Obama đã đưa ra những giải pháp nào để giải quyết hai vấn đề chính trong bảy vấn đề ông nêu ra là tranh chấp Do Thái – Palestine và vấn nạn vũ khí nguyên tử của Iran” thì họ sẽ không tìm thấy câu trả lời trong bài diễn văn dài của ông. Tổng thống Obama ghi nhận hai vấn đề đó là phức tạp nhất nhưng không đưa ra một giải pháp dứt khoát nào. Và nếu Hoa Kỳ không cam kết dứt khoát sẽ làm thì những gì tổng thống Obama nói chẳng khác gì những vị tổng thống tiền nhiệm đã nói. Khác chăng là tổng thống Obama phát biểu trước một diễn đàn quốc tế thuận lợi hơn diễn đàn phát biểu của các vị tổng thống Hoa Kỳ khác. Tuy thông cảm với hoàn cảnh lịch sử của Do Thái buộc họ phải hành động mạnh và đôi khi có tính lấn lướt người Palestines và các nước A Rập chung quanh để sống còn, nhưng thế giới không khỏi cảm thấy người Do Thái đã đi quá trớn trong việc uy hiếp người Palestine. Hai vùng đất hứa hẹn cho người Palestine lập quốc (Gaza và Tây Ngạn sông Jordan) vẫn bị phân ly. Gaza bị bao vây kinh tế triền miên. Vùng Tây ngạn bị gặm nhắm bởi bức tường chia cắt, trong khi người Do thái cứ xây thêm khu định cư để vừa chiếm đất vừa chia năm xẻ bảy đất đai của người Palestine làm cho người Palestines di chuyển làm ăn khó khăn. Phần thánh địa Jeruzalem dành cho người Palestines càng ngày càng bị thu hẹp bởi các khu phát triển của người Do thái. Thế giới thấy rằng một giải pháp Do Thái – Palestine chỉ có thể thành hình và do đó chấm dứt mọi hành động đánh trả của người Palestines chừng nào Palestine được Do thái công nhận như một quốc gia độc lập với đường giao thông giữa Gaza và Tây Ngạn, bức tường phân chia Do thái và Tây ngạn phải trở về ranh giới trước cuộc chiến 1967, các khu đinh cư người Do thái trong vùng Tây ngạn phải được giở bỏ (đương nhiên chính quyền hợp pháp của Palestine phải công nhận trước quốc tế sự tồn tại của Do thái và chấm dứt mọi cuộc khủng bố). Tổng thống Obama có định áp lưc Do thái thực hiện những điều kiện tiên quyết hợp lý trên không ? Nếu Do thái không làm Hoa Kỳ sẽ hành động như thế nào ? Chừng nào những vấn đề cốt lõi trên chưa được bàn tới thì cuộc chiến tranh dai dẵng giữa Do thái và Palestine vẫn chưa có giải pháp. Vì vậy những gì tổng thống Obama phác họa cũng chỉ là những hứa hẹn. Và khi liên hệ đến Do thái thì thế giới đều biết khả năng hành động của Hoa Kỳ rất giới hạn. Chúng ta thấy được sự lúng túng của tổng thống Obama khi ông nói Hoa Kỳ không muốn thấy những cuộc bầu cử mà kết quả được tiền chế, và tôn trọng kết quả những cuộc bầu cử phản ảnh ý của đa số người dân nhưng ông vẫn không thay đổi nổi chính sách của Hoa Kỳ

hiện nay không công nhận nhóm Hamas đại điện cho nhân dân Palestine trong vùng Gaza qua cuộc bầu cử sòng phẳng tháng Giêng năm 2005. Bước sang vấn đề nhức nhối khác là Iran định chế tạo vũ khí nguyên tử. Thế giới sẽ không thể giải quyết vấn đề chế tạo vũ khí nguyên tử khi năm nước Nga, Mỹ, Anh, Pháp và Trung quốc chính thức có vũ khí nguyên tử (bây giờ thêm Ấn Độ, Pakistan được công nhận có bom nguyên tử, và nhiều nước có bom nguyên tử nhưng không nói ra như Do Thái, Đài Loan ...) và ràng buộc các quốc gia khác qua hiệp ước không phổ biến hiểu biết về nguyên tử (Non Proliferation Treaty – NPT). Muốn cấm các nước khác chế tạo vũ khí nguyên tử trước hết các quốc gia được xem có vũ khí nguyên tử (chính thức hay không chính thức) phải có chương trình hủy bỏ toàn bộ kho vũ khí của mình để tạo một thế giới không có vũ khí nguyên tử. Tổng thống Obama đã có chương trình gì về hướng này trước khi tìm cách ngăn chận Iran lợi dụng phát triển năng lượng nguyên tử để chế tạo vũ khí nguyên tử? Tổng thống Obama chưa có chương trình gì dứt khoát. Thật ra trên thực tế ông cũng không thể đưa ra đề nghị hủy bỏ toàn bộ kho vũ khí nguyên tử trên thế giới. Trước hết quốc hội Hoa Kỳ không bao giớ chấp nhận một chương trình như vậy vì lý do an ninh. Và ông Obama sẽ không khỏi bị kết án trói tay Hoa Kỳ trước một thế giới nhiễu nhương. Nếu là một chương trình của Liên hiệp quốc Trung quốc sẽ phủ quyết vì Trung quốc cũng như Hoa Kỳ không thể hủy bỏ kho vũ khí nguyên tử biểu tượng của cường quốc. Bức tranh đó cho chúng ta thấy tổng thống Obama bị bó tay, vì dù ông muốn ông cũng không thể tạo ra một thế giới công bình. Và chừng nào thế giới chỉ vận hành trên sự công bình bằng lời nói chứ không bằng hành động cụ thể thì mọi cuộc tranh cãi chỉ tốn bút mực và nước bọt chứ thế giới không thể tiến gần đến hòa bình như mọi người mong đợi. Bài diễn văn ngày 4 tháng 6 tại Cairo của tổng thống Obama với chủ ý đề ra những phương thức để tránh một vấn nạn đang đe dọa thế giới chứa đựng thật nhiều thiện chí của một vị tổng thống trẻ tuổi tài ba, nhưng – vì tình hình thực tế của thế giới – đã không làm cho ai yên tâm vì nó chỉ là lời nói mà thiếu thực chất. Tổng thống Obama muốn giải trừ mối đe dọa hòa bình thế giới. Nhưng có thể nhân loại đã đi quá xa, quá nhanh và đang lao mình đến một nơi vô định mà một người có quyền lực nhất thế giới như vị tổng thống Hoa Kỳ – dù muốn – cũng không thể thắng nó lại. Hy vọng của mỗi công dân thế giới là “Cùng tất biến!” Nhưng không biết biến rồi có thông không ?

Trần Bình Nam June 9, 2009 binhnam@sbcglobal.net www.tranbinhnam.com

(1) Xem nguyên văn bài diễn văn của tổng thống Barack Obama tại Ai Cập sau:

Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt
June 4, 2009
1:10 P.M. (Local)

Thank you very much. Good afternoon. I am honored to be in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable institutions. For over a thousand years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning; and for over a century, Cairo University has been a source of Egypt’s advancement. And together, you represent the harmony between tradition and progress. I’m grateful for your hospitality, and the hospitality of the people of Egypt. And I’m also proud to carry with me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: Assalaamu alaykum. (Applause.)

We meet at a time of great tension between the United States and Muslims around the
world — tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond any current policy debate. The
relationship between Islam and the West includes centuries of coexistence and
cooperation, but also conflict and religious wars. More recently, tension has been fed by
colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in
which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their
own aspirations. Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalization
led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam.

Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of
Muslims. The atổng thốngacks of September 11, 2001 and the continued efforts of these
extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view
Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human
rights. All this has bred more fear and more mistrust.
So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who
sow hatred rather than peace, those who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that
can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. And this cycle of suspicion and
discord must end.

I’ve come here to Cairo to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims
around the world, one based on mutual interest and mutual respect, and one based upon
the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition.
Instead, they overlap, and share common principles — principles of justice and progress;
tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.

I do so recognizing that change cannot happen overnight. I know there’s been a lot of
publicity about this speech, but no single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I
answer in the time that I have this afternoon all the complex questions that brought us to
this point. But I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly to each
other the things we hold in our hearts and that too often are said only behind closed
doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other;
to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us, “Be
conscious of God and speak always the truth.” (Applause.) That is what I will try to do
today — to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my
belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces
that drive us apart.

Now part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I’m a Christian, but my
father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I
spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and
at the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many
found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith.

As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam. It was Islam — at places
like Al-Azhar — that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the
way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim
communities — (applause) — it was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the
order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and
printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic
culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished
music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout
history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious
tolerance and racial equality. (Applause.)

I also know that Islam has always been a part of America’s story. The first nation to
recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second
President, John Adams, wrote, “The United States has in itself no character of enmity
against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims.” And since our founding, American
Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, they have
served in our government, they have stood for civil rights, they have started businesses,
they have taught at our universities, they’ve excelled in our sports arenas, they’ve won
Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first
Muslim American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our
Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers — Thomas
Jefferson — kept in his personal library. (Applause.)

So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first
revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and
Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn’t. And I consider it part of my
responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of
Islam wherever they appear. (Applause.)
But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. (Applause.) Just
as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a selfinterested
empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that
the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were
founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled
for centuries to give meaning to those words — within our borders, and around the world.
We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a
simple concept: E pluribus unum — “Out of many, one.”

Now, much has been made of the fact that an African American with the name Barack
Hussein Obama could be elected President. (Applause.) But my personal story is not so
unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in
America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores — and that includes nearly
7 million American Muslims in our country today who, by the way, enjoy incomes and
educational levels that are higher than the American average. (Applause.)
Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one’s religion.
That is why there is a mosque in every state in our union, and over 1,200 mosques within
our borders. That’s why the United States government has gone to court to protect the
right of women and girls to wear the hijab and to punish those who would deny it.
(Applause.)

So let there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America. And I believe that America holds
within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share
common aspirations — to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with
dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. These things we share.
This is the hope of all humanity.

Of course, recognizing our common humanity is only the beginning of our task. Words
alone cannot meet the needs of our people. These needs will be met only if we act boldly
in the years ahead; and if we understand that the challenges we face are shared, and our
failure to meet them will hurt us all.

For we have learned from recent experience that when a financial system weakens in one
country, prosperity is hurt everywhere. When a new flu infects one human being, all are
at risk. When one nation pursues a nuclear weapon, the risk of nuclear atổng thốngack rises for all
nations. When violent extremists operate in one stretch of mountains, people are
endangered across an ocean. When innocents in Bosnia and Darfur are slaughtered, that
is a stain on our collective conscience. (Applause.) That is what it means to share this
world in the 21st century. That is the responsibility we have to one another as human
beings.

And this is a difficult responsibility to embrace. For human history has often been a
record of nations and tribes — and, yes, religions — subjugating one another in pursuit of
their own interests. Yet in this new age, such atổng thốngitudes are self-defeating. Given our
interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over
another will inevitably fail. So whatever we think of the past, we must not be prisoners
to it. Our problems must be dealt with through partnership; our progress must be shared.
(Applause.)

Now, that does not mean we should ignore sources of tension. Indeed, it suggests the
opposite: We must face these tensions squarely. And so in that spirit, let me speak as
clearly and as plainly as I can about some specific issues that I believe we must finally
confront together.

The first issue that we have to confront is violent extremism in all of its forms.
In Ankara, I made clear that America is not — and never will be — at war with Islam.
(Applause.) We will, however, relentlessly confront violent extremists who pose a grave
threat to our security — because we reject the same thing that people of all faiths reject:
the killing of innocent men, women, and children. And it is my first duty as President to
protect the American people.

The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America’s goals, and our need to work
together. Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al Qaeda and the Taliban with
broad international support. We did not go by choice; we went because of necessity. I’m
aware that there’s still some who would question or even justify the events of 9/11. But
let us be clear: Al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were
innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done
nothing to harm anybody. And yet al Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people,
claimed credit for the atổng thốngack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive
scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These
are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with.

Now, make no mistake: We do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan. We see no
military — we seek no military bases there. It is agonizing for America to lose our young
men and women. It is costly and politically difficult to continue this conflict. We would
gladly bring every single one of our troops home if we could be confident that there were
not violent extremists in Afghanistan and now Pakistan determined to kill as many
Americans as they possibly can. But that is not yet the case.

And that’s why we’re partnering with a coalition of 46 countries. And despite the costs
involved, America’s commitment will not weaken. Indeed, none of us should tolerate
these extremists. They have killed in many countries. They have killed people of
different faiths — but more than any other, they have killed Muslims. Their actions are
irreconcilable with the rights of human beings, the progress of nations, and with Islam.
The Holy Koran teaches that whoever kills an innocent is as — it is as if he has killed all
mankind. (Applause.) And the Holy Koran also says whoever saves a person, it is as if
he has saved all mankind. (Applause.) The enduring faith of over a billion people is so
much bigger than the narrow hatred of a few. Islam is not part of the problem in
combating violent extremism — it is an important part of promoting peace.

Now, we also know that military power alone is not going to solve the problems in
Afghanistan and Pakistan. That’s why we plan to invest $1.5 billion each year over the
next five years to partner with Pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and
businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who’ve been displaced. That’s why we
are providing more than $2.8 billion to help Afghans develop their economy and deliver
services that people depend on.

Let me also address the issue of Iraq. Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice that
provoked strong differences in my country and around the world. Although I believe that
the Iraqi people are ultimately betổng thốnger off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also
believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build
international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible. (Applause.) Indeed,
we can recall the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said: “I hope that our wisdom will
grow with our power, and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be.”

Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a betổng thốnger future — and to
leave Iraq to Iraqis. And I have made it clear to the Iraqi people — (applause) — I have
made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory
or resources. Iraq’s sovereignty is its own. And that’s why I ordered the removal of our
combat brigades by next August. That is why we will honor our agreement with Iraq’s
democratically elected government to remove combat troops from Iraqi cities by July,
and to remove all of our troops from Iraq by 2012. (Applause.) We will help Iraq train
its security forces and develop its economy. But we will support a secure and united Iraq
as a partner, and never as a patron.

And finally, just as America can never tolerate violence by extremists, we must never
alter or forget our principles. Nine-eleven was an enormous trauma to our country. The
fear and anger that it provoked was understandable, but in some cases, it led us to act
contrary to our traditions and our ideals. We are taking concrete actions to change
course. I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I
have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year. (Applause.)
So America will defend itself, respectful of the sovereignty of nations and the rule of law.
And we will do so in partnership with Muslim communities which are also threatened.
The sooner the extremists are isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the
sooner we will all be safer.

The second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation between
Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world.
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.

Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in
Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald,
which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and
gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed — more than the entire
Jewish population of Israel today. Denying that fact is baseless, it is ignorant, and it is
hateful. Threatening Israel with destruction — or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews –
is deeply wrong, and only serves to evoke in the minds of Israelis this most painful of
memories while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve.

On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people — Muslims and
Christians — have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than 60 years they’ve
endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza,
and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to
lead. They endure the daily humiliations — large and small — that come with occupation.
So let there be no doubt: The situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. And
America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity,
opportunity, and a state of their own. (Applause.)

For decades then, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations,
each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive. It’s easy to point fingers –
for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought about by Israel’s founding, and for
Israelis to point to the constant hostility and atổng thốngacks throughout its history from within its
borders as well as beyond. But if we see this conflict only from one side or the other,
then we will be blind to the truth: The only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides
to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and
security. (Applause.)

That is in Israel’s interest, Palestine’s interest, America’s interest, and the world’s interest.
And that is why I intend to personally pursue this outcome with all the patience and
dedication that the task requires. (Applause.) The obligations — the obligations that the
parties have agreed to under the road map are clear. For peace to come, it is time for
them — and all of us — to live up to our responsibilities.

Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong
and it does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the
whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full
and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center
of America’s founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to
South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It’s a story with a simple truth: that
violence is a dead end. It is a sign neither of courage nor power to shoot rockets at
sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That’s not how moral authority is
claimed; that’s how it is surrendered.

Now is the time for Palestinians to focus on what they can build. The Palestinian
Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with institutions that serve the needs of its
people. Hamas does have support among some Palestinians, but they also have to
recognize they have responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, to
unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, recognize past
agreements, recognize Israel’s right to exist.

At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel’s right to exist cannot be
denied, neither can Palestine’s. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of
continued Israeli setổng thốnglements. (Applause.) This construction violates previous
agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these setổng thốnglements to
stop. (Applause.)

And Israel must also live up to its obligation to ensure that Palestinians can live and work
and develop their society. Just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing
humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel’s security; neither does the continuing
lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people
must be a critical part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable
such progress.

And finally, the Arab states must recognize that the Arab Peace Initiative was an
important beginning, but not the end of their responsibilities. The Arab-Israeli conflict
should no longer be used to distract the people of Arab nations from other problems.
Instead, it must be a cause for action to help the Palestinian people develop the
institutions that will sustain their state, to recognize Israel’s legitimacy, and to choose
progress over a self-defeating focus on the past.

America will align our policies with those who pursue peace, and we will say in public
what we say in private to Israelis and Palestinians and Arabs. (Applause.) We cannot
impose peace. But privately, many Muslims recognize that Israel will not go away.
Likewise, many Israelis recognize the need for a Palestinian state. It is time for us to act
on what everyone knows to be true.

Too many tears have been shed. Too much blood has been shed. All of us have a
responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see
their children grow up without fear; when the Holy Land of the three great faiths is the
place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home
for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to
mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra — (applause) — as in the story of Isra,
when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed, peace be upon them, joined in prayer. (Applause.)
The third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of
nations on nuclear weapons.

This issue has been a source of tension between the United States and the Islamic
Republic of Iran. For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my
country, and there is in fact a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold
War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian
government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostagetaking
and violence against U.S. troops and civilians. This history is well known. Rather
than remain trapped in the past, I’ve made it clear to Iran’s leaders and people that my
country is prepared to move forward. The question now is not what Iran is against, but
rather what future it wants to build.

I recognize it will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with
courage, rectitude, and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two
countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of
mutual respect. But it is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons,
we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America’s interests. It’s about
preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the
world down a hugely dangerous path.

I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No
single nation should pick and choose which nation holds nuclear weapons. And that’s
why I strongly reaffirmed America’s commitment to seek a world in which no nations
hold nuclear weapons. (Applause.) And any nation — including Iran — should have the
right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the
nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the treaty, and it
must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I’m hopeful that all countries in the region
can share in this goal.

The fourth issue that I will address is democracy. (Applause.)
I know — I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent
years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear:
No system of government can or should be imposed by one nation by any other.
That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the
people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions
of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as
we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But I do have an
unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind
and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal
administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn’t steal from the
people; the freedom to live as you choose. These are not just American ideas; they are
human rights. And that is why we will support them everywhere. (Applause.)

Now, there is no straight line to realize this promise. But this much is clear:
Governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable, successful and secure.
Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. America respects the right of
all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree
with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments — provided they
govern with respect for all their people.

This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only
when they’re out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of
others. (Applause.) So no matổng thốnger where it takes hold, government of the people and by
the people sets a single standard for all who would hold power: You must maintain your
power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and
participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your
people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without
these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Barack Obama, we love you!
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thank you. (Applause.) The fifth issue that we must address
together is religious freedom.
Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and
Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout
Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country. That is the spirit we
need today. People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith based
upon the persuasion of the mind and the heart and the soul. This tolerance is essential for
religion to thrive, but it’s being challenged in many different ways.
Among some Muslims, there’s a disturbing tendency to measure one’s own faith by the
rejection of somebody else’s faith. The richness of religious diversity must be upheld –
whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. (Applause.) And if we are
being honest, fault lines must be closed among Muslims, as well, as the divisions
between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq.

Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live together. We must always
examine the ways in which we protect it. For instance, in the United States, rules on
charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation.
That’s why I’m commitổng thốnged to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can
fulfill zakat.

Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from
practicing religion as they see fit — for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim
woman should wear. We can’t disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence
of liberalism.

In fact, faith should bring us together. And that’s why we’re forging service projects in
America to bring together Christians, Muslims, and Jews. That’s why we welcome
efforts like Saudi Arabian King Abdullah’s interfaith dialogue and Turkey’s leadership in
the Alliance of Civilizations. Around the world, we can turn dialogue into interfaith
service, so bridges between peoples lead to action — whether it is combating malaria in
Africa, or providing relief after a natural disaster.
The sixth issue — the sixth issue that I want to address is women’s rights. (Applause.) I
know –- I know — and you can tell from this audience, that there is a healthy debate about
this issue. I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her
hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is
denied equality. (Applause.) And it is no coincidence that countries where women are
well educated are far more likely to be prosperous.

Now, let me be clear: Issues of women’s equality are by no means simply an issue for
Islam. In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, we’ve seen Muslim-majority
countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the struggle for women’s equality continues
in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world.

I am convinced that our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons.
(Applause.) Our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity — men
and women — to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the
same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live
their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. And that is why the United
States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for
girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps
people live their dreams. (Applause.)

Finally, I want to discuss economic development and opportunity.
I know that for many, the face of globalization is contradictory. The Internet and
television can bring knowledge and information, but also offensive sexuality and
mindless violence into the home. Trade can bring new wealth and opportunities, but also
huge disruptions and change in communities. In all nations — including America — this
change can bring fear. Fear that because of modernity we lose control over our economic
choices, our politics, and most importantly our identities — those things we most cherish
about our communities, our families, our traditions, and our faith.

But I also know that human progress cannot be denied. There need not be contradictions
between development and tradition. Countries like Japan and South Korea grew their
economies enormously while maintaining distinct cultures. The same is true for the
astonishing progress within Muslim-majority countries from Kuala Lumpur to Dubai. In
ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of
innovation and education.

And this is important because no development strategy can be based only upon what
comes out of the ground, nor can it be sustained while young people are out of work.
Many Gulf states have enjoyed great wealth as a consequence of oil, and some are
beginning to focus it on broader development. But all of us must recognize that
education and innovation will be the currency of the 21st century — (applause) — and in
too many Muslim communities, there remains underinvestment in these areas. I’m
emphasizing such investment within my own country. And while America in the past has
focused on oil and gas when it comes to this part of the world, we now seek a broader
engagement.

On education, we will expand exchange programs, and increase scholarships, like the one
that brought my father to America. (Applause.) At the same time, we will encourage
more Americans to study in Muslim communities. And we will match promising Muslim
students with internships in America; invest in online learning for teachers and children
around the world; and create a new online network, so a young person in Kansas can
communicate instantly with a young person in Cairo.
On economic development, we will create a new corps of business volunteers to partner
with counterparts in Muslim-majority countries. And I will host a Summit on
Entrepreneurship this year to identify how we can deepen ties between business leaders,
foundations and social entrepreneurs in the United States and Muslim communities
around the world.

All these things must be done in partnership. Americans are ready to join with citizens
and governments; community organizations, religious leaders, and businesses in Muslim
communities around the world to help our people pursue a betổng thốnger life.
The issues that I have described will not be easy to address. But we have a responsibility
to join together on behalf of the world that we seek — a world where extremists no longer
threaten our people, and American troops have come home; a world where Israelis and
Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own, and nuclear energy is used for
peaceful purposes; a world where governments serve their citizens, and the rights of all
God’s children are respected. Those are mutual interests. That is the world we seek. But
we can only achieve it together.

I know there are many — Muslim and non-Muslim — who question whether we can forge
this new beginning. Some are eager to stoke the flames of division, and to stand in the
way of progress. Some suggest that it isn’t worth the effort — that we are fated to
disagree, and civilizations are doomed to clash. Many more are simply skeptical that real
change can occur. There’s so much fear, so much mistrust that has built up over the
years. But if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward. And I
want to particularly say this to young people of every faith, in every country — you, more
than anyone, have the ability to reimagine the world, to remake this world.
All of us share this world for but a brief moment in time. The question is whether we
spend that time focused on what pushes us apart, or whether we commit ourselves to an
effort — a sustained effort — to find common ground, to focus on the future we seek for
our children, and to respect the dignity of all human beings.

It’s easier to start wars than to end them. It’s easier to blame others than to look inward.
It’s easier to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we
should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There’s one rule that lies at the heart
of every religion — that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us.
(Applause.) This truth transcends nations and peoples — a belief that isn’t new; that isn’t
black or white or brown; that isn’t Christian or Muslim or Jew. It’s a belief that pulsed in
the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the hearts of billions around the world. It’s
a faith in other people, and it’s what brought me here today.
We have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the courage to make a
new beginning, keeping in mind what has been writổng thốngen.

The Holy Koran tells us: “O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we
have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another.”
The Talmud tells us: “The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of promoting peace.”
The Holy Bible tells us: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of
God.” (Applause.)

The people of the world can live together in peace. We know that is God’s vision. Now
that must be our work here on Earth.
Thank you. And may God’s peace be upon you. Thank you very much. Thank you.
(Applause.)