• IA News
• Events

This week's press review is dedicated to president Obama's second speach adressing the Middle East and North Africa, held at the State Department in Washington DC on May 19th, 2011. The previous adress was made in Cairo on June 4th, 2009, and was aimed at addressing the (perceived) "gap" which had been parting the  United States of America and the Arab world. In this adress, president Obama sent clear messages to many governments leaders in the region; but also and maybe for the first time in history, a president of United States directly addressed the Arab people.

Barack Obama has drawn the picture of a changing Arab world and made it clear that United States will support its ongoing democratic aspiration. The core point of Obama's adress is to draw a conclusion on what is the biggest threat to US prception in the region according to him: "the failure to speak to the broader aspirations of ordinary people will only feed the suspicion that has festered for years that the United States pursues our own interests at their expense." In other terms US policy in the region if not a support of human right, democracy and civil societies will entail the risk of weakening the ties between the country and future democratic arab states.

Support for democratic reforms

Consequently the bottom line of US policy will be  a strong policy supporting democratic change in North Africa. This policy is likely to be implemented following a strategic understanding with the European Union similar to what has been enforced during east european countries transitions; that is to say a strong transatlantic partnership for democratic change and economic reform is expecting to be framed and implemneted quickly. Main challenges appear to be stabilization and free elections in Tunisia and Egypt, support transition in Libya and support of reforms and reconciliation in Algeria and Morocco (not mentioned in the speech but known for being one particular topic of US diplomacy in north Africa). Beyond financial help, United States is proposing a broader access to US inner market and fostering US investment in the aera. This supportive policy will be conditionnal to democratic reform.

Mr. Obama however recalled that US must act with humility beacause "It is not America that put people into the streets of Tunis and Cairo -- it was the people themselves who launched these movements, and must determine their outcome." and warned also that "and there will be times when our short term interests do not align perfectly with our long term vision of the region." However the president spoke clearly about the current situation in Bahrain and called the government to " create the conditions of dialogue". He reaffirmed his determination to oust Moammar  Kadhafi and warned Bashar Al Assad that he has to choose "between leading the transition or get of the way." Situation in Yemen has been notably eluded.

Positive opinion on US and on Obama administration among the Arab people remains fairly low. The impopularity of US among Arab world is however not specifc to the current administration but rather a consequent of the perceived role of US policy in the region. In some extent, Obama's administration has a better image than the previous one. Barack Obama seems to be conscious of the broad scepticism in the Arab world about US. Somehow he ackowledged the need for US to give a greater freedom to Arab foreign policies, calling them however to hold a "responsible regional leadership". He also stated specifically that US diplomacy will tie stronger relationships with the civil societies even if "not officially endorsed organizations." More generally president Obama attempted to connect the values of the revolutions in the Arab world with those shared by the American people.

Israel-Palestine conflict will still been a point of discord

Two days after Obama' speech, Benyamin Netanyahu was received to the White House. He then adressed the US congress. Two days before the Middle East speech, Mahmoud Abbas released a long tribune in the New York Times , "the long overdue palestinian state". Then May 22nd, president Obama addressed the AIPAC gathering, the most prominent jewish organization in Washington. These mere interventions have a clear signification: Israel-Palestian conflict is moving at the top of the agenda. This is quite understandeable as it entails the risk of a major disagreement between US and the Arab world. Few days earlier, during the Nakba day non violent marchs had taken place at the Israel boundaries putting Palestine as a top concern for the democratic protesters.

Barack Obama made two very important remarks on the US ongoing approach to the "non existing" peace process in the Middle East. His speech produces also a synthetic polemic. First remark: United States will veto any attempt of UN resolution that recognize a Palestinian State before a final negotiation finish. Second remark: after the palestinian reconciliation, United States demand Hamas to recognize previous agreement between PLO and Israel, and also to recognize Israel's right to exist -those are also the  Quarter requisites to allow Hamas to take part to the negotiations.

Barack Obama urged to resume stalling negotiations starting with the topics of security and borders. He mentionned  explicitly that thee 1967 borders with mutually agreed land swaps is the basis of the negotiation. Albeit this stance  has been already expressed by the two previous administrations -Cinton and Bush- Prime minister Netanyahu called these terms unacceptable. Each of the republican candidates to the presidential nomination opposed strongly president adress calling it a betrayal of Israel.

In a closer look, Obama's adress has in the contrary a very pro Israelian stance as underlined by Aluf Benn, editorialist at the israelian daily "haaretz". Two of the most important items of Israel foreign policy have been remarkably endorsed by the American president (veto to the palestinian State and very cautious approach about palestinian reconciliation). Ian Black in "the guardian" and Aluf Benn in "haaretz" see polemic on boundaries provoked by the israelian Prime minister as a proof he doesn't really want to resume negotiation.

However Barack Obama stands firmly to the opening of negotiations talks and underlined his concern for Israel long term security in a changing Arab world. In his speech at the AIPAC gathering, Barack Obama reaffirmed his will to see the negotiations resume on boundaries issue and mentioned specifically the 1967 borders with mutually agreed land swaps.

 

In front of a jewish american assistance, Barack Obama has subtly made a difference between friendship between Israel and united States and relationships between him and the Prime minister. He reaffirmed his commitment to Israel security and develop his previous point on 1967 borders. According to him it meant that Israel will not have the same boundaries after the final agreement as before june 4th 1967.

However, the positions between Benyamin Netanyahu and the Palestinian leaderships are impossible to bridge and it is unlikely that negotiations resume. Obama's visit to Europe at the occasion of the G8 summit will provide an excellent occasion to strenghten a transatlantic policy for the Middle East and North Africa and to discuss his strategy with his European counterparts.

Positions of Europe and US are notably different on the specific topic of the Middle East peace process. Some of the european countries belonging to the Quarttete such as France -which is not the only country to think so in Europe- see Palestinian reconciliation as an opportunity for the peace. Alain Juppé, french minister of foreign affairs mentionned it explicitly in his last interview in Al hayat daily. According to this approach, correct incentives could in a short term produce a shift in Hamas position onwards Israel.

If Quartet group or US is not able to provide a viable and efficient patform for negotiations, a major crisis in the Middle East will become each month more probable, endangering democratic transition in many countries.

Turkey, which role has been reinforced in the region thanks to its boilant economy and its successful political reform sidelining role of the army in politics and allowing emergence of a democratic islamist leadership, has also expressed its position through the comments of its president Abdullah Gül to Wall Street journal.  Turkey called Hamas to recognize the right of Israel to exist and called Israel to resume negotiation on fair basis.

This position is interesting since the country could play a major role as example of how political play in the region could include a democratic and balanced islamist party together with a open and free economy.