Bush's speech in Turkey; what do you think of it?

JustCause · June 29, 2004

Source: The Guardian UK

The full text of the speech given by George Bush to the NATO summit at Galatasary University, Istanbul, Turkey.

The full text released by the White House

Tuesday June 29, 2004

Thank you all very much. Distinguished guests, Director of this fine university, ladies and gentlemen: Laura and I are grateful for the warm and gracious hospitality we have received these past three days in the Republic of Turkey. I am honored to visit this beautiful country where two continents meet -- a nation that upholds great tradition, and faces the future with confidence. America is honored to call Turkey an ally and a friend.

Many Americans trace their heritage to Turkey, and Turks have contributed greatly to our national life -- including, most recently, a lot of baskets for the Detroit Pistons from Mehmet Okur. I know you're proud of this son of your country, and there's a lot of people in Detroit really grateful for his talents.

I'm grateful to my friend, the Prime Minister, for his leadership and his hospitality. I also want to thank my friend, the President, President Sezer, for his hospitality. These men and your country have hosted members of NATO in an historic time in our alliance. For most of its history, NATO existed to deter aggression from a powerful army at the heart of Europe. In this century, NATO looks outward to new threats that gather in secret and bring sudden violence to peaceful cities. We face terrorist networks that rejoice when parents bury their murdered children, or rejoice when bound men plead for mercy. We face outlaw regimes that give aid and shelter to these killers, and seek weapons of mass murder. We face the challenges of corruption and poverty and disease, which throw whole nations into chaos and despair. These are the conditions in which terrorism can survive.

Some on both sides of the Atlantic have questioned whether the NATO alliance still has a great purpose. To find that purpose, they only need to open their eyes. The dangers are in plain sight. The only question is whether we will confront them, or look away and pay a terrible cost.

Over the last few years, NATO has made its decision. Our alliance is restructuring to oppose threat that arise beyond the borders of Europe. NATO is providing security in Afghanistan. NATO has agreed to help train the security forces of a sovereign Iraq, which is a great advantage and crucial success for the Iraqi people. And in Istanbul we have dedicated ourselves to the advance of reform in the broader Middle East, because all people deserve a just government, and because terror is not the tool of the free. Through decades of the Cold War, our great alliance of liberty never failed in its duties, and we are rising to our duties once again.

The Turkish people understand the terrorists, because you have seen their work, even in the last weeks. You've heard the sirens, and witnessed the carnage, and mourned the dead. After the murders of Muslims, and Christians, and Jews in Istanbul last November, a resident of this city said of the terrorists, "They don't have any religion, they are friends of evil." In one of the attacks, a Muslim woman lost her son Ahmet, her daughter-in-law Berta, and her unborn grandchild. This is what she said: "Today I am saying goodbye to my son. Tomorrow I'm saying farewell to my Berta. I don't know what [the killers] wanted from my kids. Were they jealous of their happiness?"

The Turkish people have grieved, but your nation is showing how terrorist violence will be overcome -- with courage, and with a firm resolve to defend your just and tolerant society. This land has always been important for its geography -- here at the meeting place of Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. Now Turkey has assumed even greater historical importance, because of your character as a nation. Turkey is a strong, secular democracy, a majority Muslim society, and a close ally of free nations. Your country, with 150 years of democratic and social reform, stands as a model to others, and as Europe's bridge to the wider world. Your success is vital to a future of progress and peace in Europe and in the broader Middle East -- and the Republic of Turkey can depend on the support and friendship of the United States of America.

For decades, my country has supported greater unity in Europe -- to secure liberty, to build prosperity, and to remove sources of conflict on this continent. Now the European Union is considering the admission of Turkey, and you are moving rapidly to meet the criteria for membership. Mustafa Kemal Ataturk had a vision of Turkey as a strong nation among other European nations. That dream can be realized by this generation of Turks. America believes that as a European power, Turkey belongs in the European Union. Your membership would also be a crucial advance in relations between the Muslim world and the West, because you are part of both. Including Turkey in the EU would prove that Europe is not the exclusive club of a single religion; it would expose the "clash of civilizations" as a passing myth of history. Fifteen years ago, an artificial line that divided Europe -- drawn at Yalta -- was erased. And now this continent has the opportunity to erase another artificial division -- by including Turkey in the future of Europe.

Turkey has found its place in the community of democracies by living out its own principles. Muslims are called to seek justice -- fairness to all, care for the stranger, compassion for those in need. And you have learned that democracy is the surest way to build a society of justice. The best way to prevent corruption and abuse of power is to hold rulers accountable. The best way to ensure fairness to all is to establish the rule of law. The best way to honor human dignity is to protect human rights. Turkey has found what nations of every culture and every region have found: If justice is the goal, then democracy is the answer.

In some parts of the world, especially in the Middle East, there is a wariness toward democracy, often based on misunderstanding. Some people in Muslim cultures identify democracy with the worst of Western popular culture, and want no part of it. And I assure them, when I speak about the blessings of liberty, coarse videos and crash -- crass commercialism are not what I have in mind. There is nothing incompatible between democratic values and high standards of decency. For the sake of their families and their culture, citizens of a free society have every right to strive peacefully for a moral society.

Democratic values also do not require citizens to abandon their faith. No democracy can allow religious people to impose their own view of perfection on others, because this invites cruelty and arrogance that are foreign to every faith. And all people in a democracy have the right to their own religious beliefs. But all democracies are made stronger when religious people teach and demonstrate upright conduct -- family commitment, respect for the law, and compassion for the weak. Democratic societies should welcome, not fear, the participation of the faithful.

In addition, democracy does not involve automatic agreement with other democracies. Free governments have a reputation for independence, which Turkey has certainly earned. And that is the way that democracy works. We deal honestly with each other, we make our own decisions, and yet, in the end, the disagreements of the moment are far outweighed by the ideals we share.

Because representative governments reflect their people, every democracy has its own structure, traditions, and opinions. There are, however, certain commitments of free government that do not change from place to place. The promise of democracy is fulfilled in freedom of speech, the rule of law, limits on the power of the state, economic freedom, respect for women, and religious tolerance. These are the values that honor the dignity of every life, and set free the creative energies that lead to progress.

Achieving these commitments of democracy can require decades of effort and reform. In my own country it took generations to throw off slavery, racial segregation, and other practices that violated our ideals. So we do not expect that other societies can be transformed in a day. But however long the journey, there is only one destination worth striving for, and that is a society of self-rule and freedom.

Democracy leads to justice within a nation, and the advance of democracy leads to greater security among nations. The reason is clear: Free peoples do not live in endless stagnation, and seethe in resentment, and lash out in envy, rage, and violence. Free peoples do not cling to every grievance of the past; they build and live for the future. This is the experience of countries in the NATO alliance. Bitterness and hostility once divided France and Germany, Germany and Poland, Romania and Hungary. But as these nations grew in liberty, ancient disputes and hatreds have been left to history. And because the people of Europe now live in hope, Europe no longer produces armed ideologies that threaten the peace of the world. Freedom in Europe has brought peace to Europe, and now freedom can bring peace to the broader Middle East.

I believe that freedom is the future of the Middle East, because I believe that freedom is the future of all humanity. And the historic achievement of democracy in the broader Middle East will be a victory shared by all. Millions who now live in oppression and want will finally have a chance to provide for their families and lead hopeful lives. Nations in the region will have greater stability because governments will have greater legitimacy. And nations like Turkey and America will be safer, because a hopeful Middle East will no longer produce ideologies and movements that seek to kill our citizens. This transformation is one of the great and difficult tasks of history. And by our own patience and hard effort, and with confidence in the peoples of the Middle East, we will finish the work that history has given us.

Democracy, by definition, must be chosen and defended by the people themselves. The future of freedom in the Islamic world will be determined by the citizens of Islamic nations, not by outsiders. And for citizens of the broader Middle East, the alternatives could not be more clear. One alternative is a political doctrine of tyranny, suicide, and murder that goes against the standards of justice found in Islam and every other great religion. The other alternative is a society of justice, where men and women live peacefully and build better lives for themselves and their children. This is the true cause of the people of the Middle East, and that cause can never be served by the murder of the innocent.

This struggle between political extremism and civilized values is unfolding in many places. We see the struggle in Iraq, where killers are attempting to undermine and intimidate a free government. We see the struggle in Iran, where tired, discredited autocrats are trying to hold back the democratic will of a rising generation. We see that struggle in Turkey, where the PKK has abandoned its cease-fire with the Turkish people and resumed violence. We see it in the Holy Land, where terrorist murderers are setting back the good cause of the Palestinian people, who deserve a reformed, peaceful, and democratic state of their own.

The terrorists are ruthless and resourceful, but they will not prevail. Already more than half of the world's Muslims live under democratically-constituted governments -- from Indonesia to West Africa, from Europe to North America. And the ideal of democracy is also powerful and popular in the Middle East. Surveys in Arab nations reveal broad support for representative government and individual liberty. We are seeing reform in Kuwait and Qatar, Bahrain and Yemen, Jordan and Morocco. We're seeing men and women of conscience and courage step forward to advocate democracy and justice in the broader Middle East.

As we found in the Soviet Union, and behind the Iron Curtain, this kind of moral conviction was more powerful than vast armies and prison walls and the will of dictators. And this kind of moral conviction is also more powerful than the whips of the Taliban, the police state of Saddam Hussein, or the cruel designs of terrorists. The way ahead is long and difficult, yet people of conscience go forward with hope. The rule of fear did not survive in Europe; the rule of free peoples will come to the Middle East.

Leaders throughout that region, including some friends of the United States, must recognize the direction of the events of the day. Any nation that compromises with violent extremists only emboldens them, and invites future violence. Suppressing dissent only increases radicalism. The long-term stability of any government depends on being open to change, and responsive to citizens. By learning these lessons, Turkey has become a great and stable democracy -- and America shares your hope that other nations will take this path.

Western nations, including my own, want to be helpful in the democratic progress of the Middle East, yet we know there are suspicions, rooted in centuries of conflict and colonialism. And in the last 60 years, many in the West have added to this distrust by excusing tyranny in the region, hoping to purchase stability at the price of liberty. But it did not serve the people of the Middle East to betray their hope of freedom. It has not made Western nations more secure to ignore the cycle of dictatorship and extremism. Instead we've seen the malice grow deeper, and the violence spread, until both have appeared on the streets of our own cities. Some types of hatred will never be appeased; they must be opposed and discredited and defeated by a hopeful alternative -- and that alternative is freedom.

Reformers in the broader Middle East are working to build freer and more prosperous societies -- and America and Turkey, the G-8, the EU and NATO have now agreed to support them. Many nations are helping the people of Afghanistan to secure a free government. And NATO now leads a military operation in Afghanistan, in the first action by the alliance outside of Europe. In Iraq, a broad coalition -- including the military forces of many NATO countries -- is helping the people of that country to build a decent and democratic government after decades of corrupt oppression. And NATO is providing support to a Polish-led division.

The government of Iraq has now taken a crucial step forward. In a nation that suffered for decades under tyranny, we have witnessed the transfer of sovereignty and the beginning of self-government. In just 15 months, the Iraqi people have left behind one of the worst regimes in the Middle East, and their country is becoming the world's newest democracy. The world has seen a great event in the history of Iraq, in the history of the Middle East, and in the history of liberty.

The rise of Iraqi democracy is bringing hope to reformers across the Middle East, and sending a very different message to Teheran and Damascus. A free and sovereign Iraq is a decisive defeat for extremists and terrorists, because their hateful ideology will lose its appeal in a free and tolerant and successful country. The terrorists are doing everything they can to undermine Iraqi democracy, by attacking all who stand for order and justice, and by committing terrible crimes to break the will of free nations. These terrorists have the ability to cause suffering and grief, but they do not have the power to alter the outcome in Iraq. The civilized world will keep its resolve, the leaders of Iraq are strong and determined, and the people of Iraq will live in freedom.

Iraq still faces hard challenges in the days and months ahead. Iraq's leaders are eager to assume responsibility for their own security, and that is our wish, as well. So this week at our summit, NATO agreed to provide assistance in training Iraqi security forces. I am grateful to Turkey and other NATO allies for helping our friends in Iraq to build a nation that governs itself and defends itself.

Our efforts to promote reform and democracy in the Middle East are moving forward. At the NATO summit, we approved the Istanbul Cooperative Initiative, offering to work together with nations of the broader Middle East to fight terrorism, to control their borders, and to aid victims of disaster. We're thankful for the important role that Turkey is playing as a democratic partner in the Broader Middle East Initiative.

For all of our efforts to succeed, however, more is needed than plans and policies. We must strengthen the ties of trust and good will between ourselves and the peoples of the Middle East. And trust and good will come more easily when men and women clear their minds, and their hearts, of suspicion and prejudice and unreasoned fear. When some in my country speak in an ill-informed and insulting manner about the Muslim faith, their words are heard abroad, and do great harm to our cause in the Middle East. When some in the Muslim world incite hatred and murder with conspiracy theories and propaganda, their words are also heard -- by a generation of young Muslims who need truth and hope, not lies and anger. All such talk, in America or in the Middle East, is dangerous and reckless and unworthy of any religious tradition. Whatever our culture differences may be, there should be respect and peace in the House of Abraham.

The Turkish writer Orhan Pamuk has said that the finest view of Istanbul is not from the shores of Europe, or from the shores of Asia, but from a bridge that unites them, and lets you see both. His work has been a bridge between cultures, and so is the Republic of Turkey. The people of this land understand, as that great writer has observed, that "What is important is not [a] clash of parties, civilizations, cultures, East and West." What is important, he says, is to realize "that other people in other continents and civilizations" are "exactly like you."

Ladies and gentlemen, in their need for hope, in their desire for peace, in their right to freedom, the peoples of the Middle East are exactly like you and like me. Their birthright of freedom has denied -- been denied for too long. We will do all in our power to help them find the blessings of liberty.

Thank you for your hospitality. May God bless Turkey, may God continue to bless the United States.

Viking · June 29, 2004

Hi Q,

Nothing new or exciting in his speech. He confirmed the ignorance of his people; despite the long illustious history the Turks have had, he mentions a basketballer as someone the nation of Turkey is proud of. He also praised Kemal Attaturk, the secularist ******* whose aim was to eliminate Islam from the public sphere. He wants Turks to be proud of Attaturk, a git who has denied Muslims a core state.

He claimed that he wanted Turkey to be part of the EU and that would end the 'clash of civilisations' and make it a historical myth. Ironically, Samuel P. Huntington, over 10 years ago in his book "The Clash of Civilisations" clearly stated that the state of Turkey would NEVER be accepted into the EU simply because EU was a Christian union which wouldn't allow over 60 million Muslims to trade and roam freely within the union.

He also did his regular Iran bashing, the only theocratic state us Muslims have. He disregards the significance of the Islamic Revolution and called the Iranian leaders "tired, discredited autocrats who are trying to hold back the democratic will of a rising generation".

As usual, he depicts the Zionist nation as a peace loving people and he called the resistance of the Palestinians "terrorist murderers that re setting back the good cause of the Palestinian people." By this, he is just confirming his right wing mentality and the neo-con strangle we all know is choking his nation.

He clearly shows that his govt doesn't want to see Islam in the public sphere but instead they want leaders like the ones they installed in Afghanistan and Iraq to rule the Muslim world.

As a Muslim, I am insulted and appalled (AS USUAL) by his speech...and the way his govt conducts its foreign policy.

JustCause · June 29, 2004

Viking, good to hear from you brother and thanks for the analysis of the speech!

I am hopeful Turkey would join the EU one day whatever the French might have to say today. As far as I can see, is question of when rather than whether they would join. The French are known to make noises and I say they bark more than they bite (or something along those lines)!

I would ask of you to be careful to whom you call kufaar, even someone like Attaturk. The Othman empire was dead by the time Attaturk got there and all he has done is ensure his people got secular government. If you wish We can discuss the benefits and disadvantages of this issue on another time. But I beg of you to be careful who you call non-Muslim, only God could judge that.

The part I liked about his speech though is where he talked about democracy. They are fine words but at least is good to hear some fine words now and then! Just like hearing a song or a poem being recited—is good for the ears mate!

“Democratic values also do not require citizens to abandon their faith. No democracy can allow religious people to impose their own view of perfection on others, because this invites cruelty and arrogance that are foreign to every faith. And all people in a democracy have the right to their own religious beliefs. But all democracies are made stronger when religious people teach and demonstrate upright conduct -- family commitment, respect for the law, and compassion for the weak. Democratic societies should welcome, not fear, the participation of the faithful.”

I am a greater believer of democracy and I think is the best system we have today. You show me a substitute and I will follow you!

Iran had to be bashed just as Israel had to be bashed for the Palestine issue and both countries for trying to acquire nuclear weapons. In the case of Israel that might be too late, as there is a very good chance they already possess these weapons! Having said that, we live in an imperfect world and thus is very difficult for any USA president to criticize Israel and so the non-bashing of Israel is not unique to Bush and this will continue for the foreseeable future—so let us get used to it and not be surprised by it every time the USA doesn’t bash Israel!

On serious note though, if I ever run for an office I would like you to be by my side and do the political analysis for me, though you will have to be a bit diplomatic sometimes, i.e. laugh while you are killing, lol!

Viking · June 30, 2004

Hi sxb,

I am very skeptical regarding Turkey's inclusion tyo the EU. There are a list of countries that have been accepted and others being considered to join the EU and Turkey got side-stepped. I for one hope that they come to their senses and stop trying to impress westerness in order to be let in in this exclusive club.

Every 'civilisation' has a 'core state', a power that looks after their interest and Muslims lack one. There are various reasons for that that we need not go into at the moment. Turkey should take on the role of leading Muslims in every field and stop building alliances with the west while making enemies of its Muslim population and neighbours.

I changed the word 'kufaar' to 'git', lol, before you even responded. I had realised my mistake, thanks for pointing it out though. I always get annoyed when talking about him, he brought the Turk house down and denied Muslims worldwide a potential core state.

I am a greater believer of democracy and I think is the best system we have today. You show me a substitute and I will follow you!

The susbtitute is Islam. No matter how viable it might seem to you today, it should be the model we believe in and hope to see make it to the public sphere. In our model, we would have a type of democracy where the people elect the leaders. But there should be a governing body that sees to it that pious, just and straight-forward leaders are chosen to lead the country.

On serious note though, if I ever run for an office I would like you to be by my side and do the political analysis for me, though you will have to be a bit diplomatic sometimes, i.e. laugh while you are killing, lol!

LOL, you know that I am extremely diplomatic. But unfortunately I believe that a job in politics would wither my myocardium.

BiLaaL · June 30, 2004

"Turkey has found what nations of every culture and every region have found: If justice is the goal, then democracy is the answer".

What kind of democracy are we talking about Uncle Sam.

"In some parts of the world, especially in the Middle East, there is a wariness toward democracy, often based on misunderstanding. Some people in Muslim cultures identify democracy with the worst of Western popular culture, and want no part of it. And I assure them, when I speak about the blessings of liberty, coarse videos and crash -- crass commercialism are not what I have in mind"

Whether he has "coarse videos and crash -- crass commercialism" in mind or not, these have been the un-mistakable by-products of western democracy. Once again sorry dude, but actions speak louder than deceiving words.

The words of Allah(A'za Wa Jallah) are indeed most true:

"...Each time they kindle the fire of war, Allah extinguishes it. They rush about the earth corrupting it. Allah does not love corrupters. (Al-Qur'an 5:64)

For the true definition of Justice lets ponder over the following Ayats of the Qur'an Kareem.

You who believe! Be upholders of justice, bearing witness for Allah alone, even against yourselves or your parents and relatives. Whether they are rich or poor, Allah is well able to look after them. Do not follow your own desires and deviate from the truth. If you twist or turn away, Allah is aware of what you do. (Al-Qur'an 4:135)

Allah commands justice and doing good and giving to relatives. And He forbids indecency and doing wrong and tyranny. He warns you so that hopefully you will pay heed. (Al-Qur'an 16:90)

Truth Seeker · June 30, 2004

Attaturk finished off a state that was in serious decline - and we know that he was supported by the British to accomplish this.

As to Democracy being the best system out there, this is false because this honour is reserved for the Islamic system - Al Khilafah.

This system when it was applied bought tranquility to two thirds of the known world in the space of half a century, democracy cannot and will not be able to make this claim.

Democracy is basically about imposing secular values on people and for Muslims this is not acceptable as Islam governs all spheres of life. Therefore to say democracy is not oppressive it is clearly false.

We can see in Iraq where so called Democracy is being implemented this is the only option being given to the Muslims becuase they have been told that they cant have Islam.

Liqaye · June 30, 2004

Pathetic speech, vintage bush.

Also who says islam and democracy are mutually exclusive.

The kilafah apart from being lead by men of intregrity who's like we are not likely to see again, the system of shure intitated dialogue and responsive governance.

Conscious Manipulation · June 30, 2004

asalaamu alaykum,

Viking good analysis jzk, I didnt even have to read the speech

Also who says islam and democracy are mutually exclusive.

The democratic ruling system and Islam are mutually exclusive. Reasong being the source of legislation in democracy is man and that of Islam is Allah. In other words, one is legislation by the people for the people and the other is legislation by Allah for the people. If however by democracy you mean a system where the people elect their own leader, while this is one of the features of democracy it is not something that's exclusive to it. In the Islamic ruling system authority belongs to the ummah and a legitimate ruler would be one who has the approval of the ummah in the form of bay'ah (pledge of alligence).

JustCause · June 30, 2004

I came across this very interesting article in today's Guardian. Read and share with us whether you agree with it or not. I agree with it 100%!

Comment

The west's Arab racket

George Bush is right about the lack of freedom in the Middle East - but wrong about its causes and solution

Jonathan Freedland

Wednesday June 30, 2004

The Guardian

George W Bush may not have read much history but he likes making it. The recent run of insider accounts of the Bush White House show the president is a man with a constant eye on the historians of the future, anxious to lend every moment just enough semi-Churchillian gravitas to make him look good in the decades to come.

So it was on Monday when he was handed a note that declared "Iraq is sovereign", immediately scrawling on it "Let freedom reign!" - as if ready for instant display behind the glass case at the future George W Bush presidential library. Those three words confirm how Bush sees himself and how he wants to be seen in the future - as a latter-day George Washington, leading subject peoples to liberty.

He has in mind not only the Iraqi nation but all the people of what he calls the Greater Middle East. The "liberation of Baghdad" is but the first step towards the transformation of the entire region.

It is not a secret plan, contained only in classified memoranda. On the contrary, Bush has declared it loud and proud, returning to the theme again in Istanbul yesterday. He articulated it most clearly in a November 2003 speech to America's National Endowment for Democracy where he set out how, though there were now 120 functioning democracies in the world, the wave of self-rule had barely touched the Middle East. Democracy had made inroads in Latin America and Asia, but had still failed to make a dent in the Arab world. Why not, the president asked: "Are the peoples of the Middle East somehow beyond the reach of liberty? Are millions of men and women and children condemned by history or culture to live in despotism?"

Bush went on to reject such "cultural condescension", insisting that liberty is universal. He called on the Arab states to open up - to respect the rule of law, recognise the equal rights of women and allow political pluralism and free speech.

For my money, it was the best speech Bush has ever given. Because on this fundamental point he is surely right. One has only to flick through the 2002 joint report of the UN development programme and the Arab fund for economic and social development to see why. This document, written by a group of Arab intellectuals, bursts with findings as stunning as they are bleak. All 22 Arab states combined, oozing as they are with natural resources and the black gold that is oil, still have a GDP smaller than Spain's and less than half that of California. Education is in a dire state: the whole Arab world translates around 300 books annually, one fifth the number translated by Greece alone. Rates of internet connection, the Arab scholars found, were less than those in sub-Saharan Africa.

What's more, the Palestinians of the Israeli-occupied West Bank and Gaza are not the only Arabs to be denied fundamental democratic rights. Using the widely accepted freedom index - which assesses everything from civil liberties to government accountability and a free press - the Arab states come at the foot of the global league table. The report was especially damning on the exclusion of women, often denied the vote and access to a basic education: "Sadly the Arab world is largely depriving itself of the productivity and creativity of half its citizens."

Bush was right to draw attention to this story of oppression and failure. Nor can he be faulted for placing it in the context of his war against al-Qaida. For if Bin Ladenism feeds off anything it is surely the frustration and despair of those who have to live in such suffocating conditions. If the right approach to the current global conflict is the one advocated by the likes of Bill Clinton and Gordon Brown - tough on terror, tough on the causes of terror - then surely the foremost "cause" is the desperate state of the Arab world.

So Bush is right in identifying the problem. Where he is wrong is in understanding its causes - and in finding a solution.

To his credit, the president does not imagine some innate Muslim or Arab incapacity for self-government: he attributes such attitudes to his enemies. But he speaks as if the Arab world became a desert for democracy through some strange act of nature, a freak accident with no rational explanation besides the evil rule of a couple of twisted dictators. What neither he, nor Tony Blair for that matter, ever acknowledges is the west's own culpability.

One does not have to be a placard-waving anti-imperialist to note that for nearly a century the Arab world has been on the receiving end of constant western meddling. If they have not got on with choosing their own governments, that's partly because we kept (and keep) stopping them! Iraq is a case in point as Britain repeatedly, from the 1920s to the 1950s, ensured the regime was to our liking. That pattern has been repeated across the region, from the tiny emirates created by a stroke of a western pen, to mighty Egypt: first Britain and then America has always plotted and connived to secure a friendly face at the top, even if the price has been the denial of the people's will.

So Bush's rhetoric is all very well, but it would ring truer if it entailed an explicit renunciation of that colonial habit. And this is not ancient history. The US still props up hideous, human rights-abusing regimes so long as the top man remains "our son of a *****". Look no further than Bush's closest chum, the ruling family of Saudi Arabia. When Bush severs his links with the House of Saud over their beheadings, oppression of women, rank corruption and denial of basic human freedom, then his words will have meaning.

But the president is wrong on the solution, too. Democracy only very rarely flows down the barrel of a gun. Post-1945 Germany and Japan were surely the exceptions in exceptional circumstances. Even putting the 2003 war to one side, the images of abuse in Abu Ghraib alone would disqualify America as a credible bringer of democracy to the Middle East.

Instead that task will have to be performed by other people and in a different way. That does not mean a new European mandate to meddle, but rather a more creative use of influence. The first move will be a withdrawal of support from offending regimes, Riyadh and Cairo among them. Next, aid and trade should be tied to democratic performance. (A cheaper and less lethal way to create a democratic model in the Middle East than invading Iraq was surely to make Egypt's annual $2bn aid package from the US conditional on Cairo sharpening up its act in the liberty department. That would have done the trick, without a shot being fired.) The west could put current Arab and other tyrannies on notice that their only way back into the global community is not simply to arrest al-Qaida suspects, but to grant basic freedoms to their own people.

Do that and then Bush will have every right to his Washingtonian rhetoric. He can chant "Let freedom reign" at the top of his voice. But not till then.

j.freedland@guardian.co.uk

BiLaaL · July 1, 2004

"The west could put current Arab and other tyrannies on notice that their only way back into the global community is not simply to arrest al-Qaida suspects, but to grant basic freedoms to their own people".

This would be unacceptable for Washington, as was the case in Algeria. Granting freedoms to the people entails that they also choose that which they are governed by. If this choice turns out to be the Shariah, then all hell will break loose in Washington. Most Western commentators such as the author of this article are too naive to realise this, perhaps with the sole exception of Samuel Huntington. In fact the whole article is seething with extravagance of metaphors, with their accompanying naive bombast.

However, i was suprised by these figures:

"All 22 Arab states combined, oozing as they are with natural resources and the black gold that is oil, still have a GDP smaller than Spain's and less than half that of California. Education is in a dire state: the whole Arab world translates around 300 books annually, one fifth the number translated by Greece alone. Rates of internet connection, the Arab scholars found, were less than those in sub-Saharan Africa".

Viking · July 1, 2004

Q,

I hear but never listen to what Bush has to say. How can he give a lesson democracy and justice while his govt is ILLEGALY holding prisoners in Guantanamo Bay? How could he give lessons in democracy, freedom and justice, while he disregards and ignores those who are in acute need of help (like the Dalfur in Sudan and the whole population of Congo) and invades the most literate and prosperous nation in the Middle East just to make it a shit-hole?

The west is not out to help Arabs prosper and build democratic govts, they are there because the resurgence of Islamism in that region scares the shit out of them. The country they have their eyes on this time is Iran.

Iran is a country where 62% of uni students are females, one of the vice presidents is a female, women are also represented in the Iranian parliament and in every other sector. Like the author said, they'll support countries like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, countries where women aren't visible or publicly represented in any way, have no voting right and can't even aqcuire a driving lisence.

It tells you about the people you are dealing with here. They want nothing good for you.

PS: Like the bro above mentioned Algeria, the plight of the Algerian people should serve as a good example to any Muslims who naively think that the west wants what's best for Muslims.

Truth Seeker · July 2, 2004

The irony, contradiction and hypocrisy were quite apparent as President Bush stood in Galatasary University, an outgrowth of the school founded by the Uthmani Islamic Khilafah in 1481 at the end of a two-day NATO meeting (29/06/04) and said, “"The future of freedom in the Islamic world will be determined by the citizens of Islamic nations, not by outsiders."

This was the attempt of Bush and the western leaders, under the guise of NATO to gloss over the atrocities, deceit and trampling over Iraq and the increasing divide between the ‘west’ and the Islamic ummah by focusing on the western initiative of spreading democracy and freedom in the Middle East.

The irony of the speech was the location of his speech. Turkey was the last seat of the Islamic Khilafah. It was the bastion where the pulpits and universities espoused the Islamic thoughts and values and the society lived in the security of the Islamic authority. It was the state that like its Islamic traditions and history represented a system that was the envy of the world where communities thrived within the Islamic values that dominated the social, economic and political life of the citizens. Therefore it is no surprise either that the leaders in the Uthmani Khilafah like Sultan Abdul Hameed valued Islam, her lands and her people and sought to protect them from the decadent kufr culture.

So the irony is obvious as Bush made his speech. The leader of ‘western decadence’ with the blood of the Muslims of Afghanistan and Iraq still fresh on his hands delivered a speech about values and concepts that contradict Islam within a university that now espouses the secular western values. As for modern day Turkey it is characterized by leaderships that have secularized Islam, adopted closeness to the enemies of Islam and the Muslims. And for all its troubles, Turkey consistently turns to the west and its culture for recognition and acceptance, though it is this, which has enslaved and humiliated her.

As for the contradiction of Bush’s speech about freedom being in the hands of citizens of the Islamic world and not by outsiders – it is undoubtedly clear to all that the leaderships in the Muslim world have been put there by the direct and ‘invisible’ hands of outsiders i.e. western governments, notably the US in recent history. This was all too evident not merely in Iraq with the recent swearing in and appointment of the ex-CIA man Iyad Allawi as Iraqi Prime Minister, but was also eloquently expressed at the meeting by another US lackey, current leader of Afghanistan, Mohammad Karzai, "I would like you to please hurry, as NATO, in Afghanistan. Come sooner than September. We see this presence as indivisible from a safe future."

What Bush probably really meant about his view of a local religiously and culturally defined democracy and freedom is that these will be determined by the citizens in the Islamic world as long as:

1. they do not contradict the interests of the west (primarily the US)

2. they do not result in the re-emergence of an Islamic political will that drives for the re-establishment of the Islamic Khilafah

3. the US retain the right to veto any decision and interfere whenever it deems necessary.

In respect to the hypocrisy of Bush’s speech, he remarked, "No democracy can allow religious people to impose their own view of perfection on others,"

However it was acceptable for the US to define and impose its perfect view upon other people, nations and states! The western drive of democracy and freedom in the Muslim world is not merely to redress the enmity that is felt by the people of that region but to discredit and discard political Islam into the throws of history.

If there was even half a word of truth in Bush’s speech then it came when he said,

"Some people in Muslim cultures identify democracy with the worst of Western popular culture and want no part of it."

What he should have concluded is that democracy is the source of all the filth, moral degeneration, social disintegration and crass commercialism that proliferates the western world and…if the lands in the Muslim world adopt it, their suffering will increase from the current injection of western culture that already pollutes the Muslim landscape.

It should be evident to the Muslims that the efforts of the western colonial powers to appease the Muslims and introduce democracy and freedom into the Muslim world in nothing more than what Allah (Subhanahu wa ta’Allah) reminds the Muslims of how they conspire and plot against Islam.

“They plot and plan. And Allah also plots and plans. Indeed the Best of Planners is Allah” [8:8]

Source: KCom Journal

Truth Seeker · July 2, 2004