Obama's Message to the Non-Democratic World

President Obama's speech at Cairo University today was not only an opportunity for him to address "the Muslim world," it was also his first major speech from an authoritarian, undemocratic country. In the broader context of how U.S. foreign policy treats questions relating to human rights and democracy, the message he delivered to authoritarian leaders and to their people may be just as consequential as the new beginning he proposed in relations between the United States and Muslims.

There has been much focus on what the Cairo speech means for U.S. policy in the Middle East - from the peace process to nuclear proliferation and even with respect to human rights and democracy promotion there. Finding the right tone and adopting the right policies in these areas will be challenging enough, and yet the question of how the Obama administration will demonstrate its adherence to universal values of human rights in its relations with key strategic allies who routinely and even systematically violate those rights is a problem with a global scale.

Looked at in that context, the Cairo speech was easy. Egypt and the United States genuinely share common strategic interests in working towards a more peaceful, more stable region in which threats from violent extremists are much diminished. The Egyptian government willingly talks the talk of democratic reform, and many Egyptian leaders even seem to believe it. Helping the Egyptian government do what it says it wants to do is certainly challenging, but the challenges are not insurmountable.

In that respect, there was much to welcome in the tone of the President's speech, notably the emphasis on partnership and on the promotion of human rights as a mutual interests between the United States and other governments. A more successful U.S. human rights promotion strategy for Egypt must focus on making the Egyptian government a partner and build on the commitments and pledges the Egyptian government has already made to improve human rights conditions.

Consider then the really tough challenges that lie ahead with less amenable governments.

This week marks the twentieth anniversary of the Tiananmen Massacre and the administration has had difficulty demonstrating concern about human rights in China, while it continues to rely on the Chinese government for cooperation on everything from the economy to climate change. to the crisis in North Korea.

In July, President Obama travels to Moscow for a summit with his Russian counterpart, Dmitri Medvedev and the launch of the trumpeted "reset" in U.S.-Russian relations. Russia's precipitous slide into authoritarianism under Vladimir Putin has been a great boon to anti-American autocrats the world over for the past eight years. A continuation of this slide threatens further instability in the former Soviet Union and a host of developments in the region and beyond that would be damaging to U.S. interests. Moreover, the Russian government - admittedly less so under Medvedev, although he has yet to prove that he can move Russian policy in a new direction - directly challenges values like democracy and human rights. The Russian government doesn't just disregard and violate these standards; it also insists it is right to do so.

The Bush administration had a clear message on U.S. support for freedom and democracy everywhere, but its policies failed to live up to the rhetoric. It is encouraging that President Obama made clear in Cairo the United States' unequivocal support for human rights "everywhere." With that commitment comes an obligation to develop policies that will give hope to people living under repressive governments everywhere.

Cairo was a first chance, on relatively friendly ground, to begin to set out a policy of human rights promotion. He made a good start, but President Obama can be sure that people from Moscow to Beijing and from Rangoon to Havana, as well as in Cairo, Damascus and Tehran, will have been hanging on every word he said, and will now be looking even more closely at what he and the United States government go on to do in the Middle East and beyond.

Neil Hicks is the International Policy Adviser for Human Rights First, a New York City-based international human rights organization. [Facebook] [Twitter]

Comments

[ApolloSpeaks]

OBAMA'S NO WIN SITUATION

Isreali Jews with practically one voice have said "NO" to Obama on freezing settlement activity on the West Bank as a first step in a renewed peace process with Palestinians. And unless Obama forces Israel to make this concession he will look weak and impotent to the Moslem world and lose the good will and credibility that he gathered from yesterday's speech as Islam's new American friend-thus further damaging US-Moslem relations. It looks to me that Obama has foolishly raised unrealistic expectations in the Moslem world while placing himself in a no win situation as Israel under Netanyahu will not change its policies on settlements. In short, yesterday's speech will likely go down in history as a well-meaning but shortsighted attempt by an inept US leader to achieve great and difficult things by words alone.

[northstar11]

why should obama be the loser in your scenario.???

the world is not collectively stupid.

ISRAELI INTRANSIGE­NCE-------­- WILL PUT THEM IN A NO WIN SITUATION.

the gig will be up --israelis have whined for years they had no partner to negotiate with.

THE WHEEL WILL HAVE SPUN FULL CIRCLE ---- israelis are the non-negotiating partner.

isralis lose ---obama wins

[ApolloSpeaks]

How can there be peace between Palestinians and Israelis when the Palis are divided into two waring camps, with both camps implacably opposed to Israel's existence as a Jewish State? How can there be peace when Israel has no peace partner? Peace is only possible when the contions for peace exist. They don't exist only the ground. If Obama denies reality he will end up a loser like Bill Clinton what Arafat kicked him in the groin and launched the 2nd intefada

[stephanemot]

Obama's "first major speech(es) from an authoritarian, undemocratic country" were delivered in Amerika, under GWB's Weapons of Mass Disinformation.

He rejected that regime the most explicit way :
http://e-blogules.blogspot.com/2009/01/true-v-false-vs-good-v-evil.html

And his Cairo speech was for the rest of the world :
http://e-blogules.blogspot.com/2009/06/state-of-world-union-obama-doctrine.html

[ANuttyReader]

Democracy does not mean or waranty freedom nor the respect of Human rigths, so please stop the lie and the superiority complex

[Pucky]

Why not the superiority complex?

A representational form of democracy is the best form there is. We should push it, and be proud of it.

[midwife42]

How much do your representatives represent you? They are, to an overwhelming degree, the moneyed elite, representing the moneyed elite. The system is set up so that a large amount of money is required to become a viable candidate, and hence the cycle is perpetuated. A large swathe of the public is essentially excluded from the public discourse. The policies enacted by both sides of the fence (although there are huge differences, please do not think I am equating the two parties) are largely out of tune with the position of the American public on a wide range of topics, giving credence to the hypothesis that the government at a national level is far from representing we, the people.

[wonketteRAWKS]

We'd be all over Bush had he not mentioned human rights, especially women's rights. Now, not so much!

When did liberals and progressives lose their spine in speaking up and out about what is right?

[We-Are-The-Ones]

I guess you missed that portion of the speech on women's rights.

And Obama had so much ground to cover because Bush F'ed up so much. There will be plenty of time to address many other issues in other speeches.

[OhgReaTone]

President Obama was also speaking to folks back home in America. The President is challenging us to live up to our historical standards of equality, education, and thoughtfulness. He may have just given us the first draft of The Obama Doctrine. ............

http://thefiresidepost.com/2009/06/04/the-seven-points-of-obamas-cairo-speech/

[DailyElitist]

Well, the "Non-Democratic World" would certainly have to include the US, wouldn't it? This ain't even close to a democracy.

[We-Are-The-Ones]

I agree. The President was speaking to Americans as well. Hopefully we can get beyond our own fears and biases.

[superstition]

Indefinite "preventative detention"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uuWVHT1WUY

Obama's support for new secrecy powers
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/06/01/photos/

Greenwald: "What kind of a country passes a law that has no purpose other than to empower its leader to suppress evidence of the torture it inflicted on people? (This) is part of a broader trend whereby the Government simply retroactively changes the law whenever it decides it does not want to abide by it. Other than creating an illusion of transparency and accountability, what's the point of having laws that purport to restrict what the Government can do if political officials just retroactively waive those laws whenever they want?

Rachel Maddow and Jonathan Turley on the obstruction of justice:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tG9Nj0OizCA

[pfrogger]

Should the US of all countries, be talking about human rights?
Seriously?

Pot meet kettle.

The world knows what America is about. Actions speak a lot louder than words. The new president is following in many of the same footsteps as the old one in the context of human rights.
Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, Bagram, Iraq, enemy combatants, etc...

Do I need to go on? It's all just talk. Tiananmen square was a birthday party compared to what America has done. The same Islamist extremists that are committing heinous crimes are the ones the US helped bolster through the Iraq war. Their numbers have swelled significantly due to Iraq. And every time another dirty secret comes out, their recruitment increases.

So excuse me if I find the idea of America educating the world on human decency and rights as beyond hypocritical. You can't condone torture and talk ad nauseum about whether it is or is not torture and expect people in the world to listen to America's lessons. Frankly all we can teach is what not to do.

[Harold Stone]

Any society with periodic changes in government will fall short of its own best ideals from time to time. America's sense of fair play, its tradition of respect for others, and its willingness to recognize and remedy injustices in its own system are respected by people in the U.S. and abroad who are not in the thrall of an unreasoning hatred.
Obama spoke with respect for his audience. This isn't a bad place to start leading by example.
If you mean to imply by the Tienanmen Square reference that China respects the rights of individuals more than the U.S., it is hard to see how history supports that conclusion.
BTW, it's "ad nauseam".

[midwife42]

Looking at history, as you suggest, it is equally difficult to come to the conclusion over the past 50 years that the US respects human rights more than China. It certainly pays lip service to it, and internally, there is little debate that it has a better record than China, but once one looks outside the country's borders the situation changes, and changes dramatically.

[Pucky]

....and who is this mythical other country that we should follow so closely?

One who has fought for other countries and their rights worldwide?

[midwife42]

The US has actively fought against human rights in countries where it's interests were perceived to be threatened, notably in South America, but pretty much across the world. It really doesn't take a lot of effort to look behind the smokescreen, you know.

[fnghauri]

OBAMA'S MESSEAGE TO THE NON_DEMOCRATIC WORLD

Does that mean there are no democracies in the Muslim World???

[ArtsyJane]

Which Muslim country do you actually consider a democracy? Indonesia? Turkey?

[ECBA88]

Did you read the post, about non-muslims across the world living in oppressive societies as an audience for the speech, or did you see the headline, hit caps lock, and go?

[fnghauri]

OBAMA'S MESSEAGE TO THE NON_DEMOCRATIC WORLD

Does mean there are no democracies in the Muslim World???

[jayzca]

Did anyone find it odd that the text version of Obama's speech from Egypt the Associated Press released completely removed the section on Israel and Palestine? So far I've seen the censored version in the LA Times and the San Francisco Chronicle online editions.

[Ergon]

Not odd, never surprised when it comes to the media, a necessary component in a 'democracy'

[ArtsyJane]

That's interesting... I read the .pdf file on the CNN website and it had the Isreal/Palestine section in it.