Thế giới Tây phương và Hồi giáo
sau bài diễn văn ngày 4/6/2009 của tổng thống Obama
Trần Bình Nam
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 sẽ 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
on 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 Palestine 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 Palestine di chuyển làm ăn khó
khăn. Phần thánh địa Jeruzalem dành cho người Palestine 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 Palestine 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 phát 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
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.)
Trần Bình
|
http://www.tranbinhnam.com |