Update 1/29/09 - Amir Tahiri calls it a "Pathetic 'Message'" Excerpt:
. . . For the first time, the question of democracy is top of the political agenda in virtually every Muslim state.
Obama should remember that he is the president of the United States - not an impartial broker. It was unfortunate that he described himself as a bridge. For a bridge has no personality of its own and cares little about who might cross it and in which direction.
IF this was meant as the first direct contact between Obama and the Mus lim world, the Al-Arabiya interview must be rated as a missed opportunity.
Obama's remarks about the Israel-Palestine issue were so trite as to merit no analysis. He said he was sending former Sen. George Mitchell to listen to all sides - as if the world has not been hearing their stories for more than six decades.
The president appeared apologetic, offering no hope for democratization and economic development. He made no mention of the economic meltdown that is creating unprecedented mass unemployment in many countries of the region.
Nor did he offer any support to democratic forces facing crucial elections in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, the Palestinian territories, Egypt and Algeria this year.
He had nothing to say about the thousands of Iranian workers who have been thrown into prison solely because they created independent trade unions. Nor did he mention Iranian women's courageous "a million signatures campaign" or the series of student revolts that have been crushed by the mullahs with exceptional violence.
Nor was there any nod toward reformers in Saudi Arabia and Egypt or the heroic Lebanese democratic leaders who are fighting to preserve their nation's independence from Iran and Syria.
Obama didn't call for the release of the tens of thousands of political prisoners held in more than two dozen Muslim countries or a moratorium on executions that each year cost the lives of hundreds of dissidents.
CASTING himself in the role of a "bridge" and dreaming of a return
to an illusionary past, Obama appeared unsure of his own identity and
confused about the role that America should play in global politics.
And that is bad news for those who believe that the United States
should use its moral, economic and political clout in support of
democratic forces throughout the world. Read the whole thing
(Original post) -Full transcript here. Ed Morrissey explains why he calls it "a charming and dangerous naivete." Victor Davis Hanson offers his own thoughts. And Krauthammer had this to say:
Conciliatory, but also apologetic and defensive, I thought needlessly. We heard him say that he we shouldn't paint Islam with a broad-brush. Who does? That's a straw man. Did the Bush administration do so?
Obama said "My job is to communicate from the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives."
Well, where is the American heartland which is arguing otherwise?
Look, if he wants — dare say, "I have Muslim relatives," as he did in the interview, "and I lived in an Muslim land," as he did in the interview, "and thus I have a special appreciation of Islam," that's OK.
But somehow he is implying that somehow the Obama era is a break with the American past. Somehow it is undoing a disrespect of Islam that had somehow occurred under the previous administration.
One week after 9/11, the president of the United States, George Bush, showed up in the Islamic center in Washington and declared Islam is peace and extended a hand of tolerance and generosity. There were no anti-Muslim riots in America. There was a spirit of generosity and tolerance.
And, in fact, over the last 20 years, the United States has been engaged in exactly five military engagements in the world, two in the Balkans, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Kuwait, all of them liberating Islamic peoples.
We have no need to apologize. Extend a hand, yes, but to imply that there was a disrespect of Islam in the last administration, I think is unfair and fictional.