Category: Turkey

  • Emergence of a New Middle East Alliance

    Emergence of a New Middle East Alliance

    Patrick Seale

    usWhile U.S. President Barack Obama makes history in Cairo this week, a new regional grouping is taking shape in the northern part of the Middle East which could turn out to be equally significant.

    Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria are developing trade, energy and security ties which signal a common will to shape their national destinies free from external – and especially Western — dictation. What are the factors driving this new grouping? They are numerous, and mostly specific to each country.

    Turkey – having faced disagreements and disappointments with the U.S. (over the Iraq war), with the European Union (over the slow pace of accession negotiations) and with Israel (over the Palestine question) — has developed an ambitious regional policy towards its Arab and Islamic neighbours.

    Turkey’s trade with Iran, which was a mere $1bn in 2000 rose to $10bn in 2008, and is projected to double to $20bn in the not too distant future. Turkey is planning to invest $12bn in Iran’s South Pars gas field – a policy strikingly at variance with the call by Israel and its American friends for additional sanctions against Iran. Some one million Iranian tourists visit Turkey each year, and millions more visit Iraq, especially Kerbala, the place where Hussein, grandson of the Prophet Muhammad was martyred in 680. His tomb is the Shi‘is holiest shrine.

    Syria’s strategic partnership with Iran is now 30 years old, and shows no sign of waning. The Tehran-Damascus-Hizballah axis is a geopolitical fact of life in the region and was widely seen, during in the Bush years, as the main obstacle to U.S.-Israeli hegemony. In contrast to his predecessor, Obama is now seeking to reach out to both Iran and Syria, but he is apparently not yet ready to recognise that Hizballah is an unavoidable actor on the Lebanese scene. If Obama’s ambitious Middle East peace plans are to be realised, a U.S. dialogue with both Hizballah and Hamas cannot be long delayed.

    Syria’s relations with Turkey – strained almost to the point of war in 1998 over Syria’s backing of the Kurdish PKK leader, Abdallah Ocalan — have improved dramatically. Two-way trade is flourishing. A straw in the wind was the recent Turkish decision to increase the flow of Euphrates water to Syria’s north-east, which has been badly hit by drought.

    Syrian-Iraqi relations, marked by extreme hostility during Saddam Hussein’s rule, have also greatly improved. Last April, Syria’s Prime Minister Muhammad Naji Otri signed a wide-ranging agreement in Baghdad establishing a free trade zone and providing for cooperation in energy and education. Syria is to participate in the rehabilitation of the Kirkuk to Banias oil pipeline which passes through Syrian territory. Syria’s port at Latakia is to be expanded and road links to Iraq improved, to provide transit facilities for Iraq’s import- export trade. A train carrying 800 tons of steel left the Syrian port of Tartous on 30 May for Baghdad, the first rail freight trip between the two countries in decades.

    Iran, Turkey, and Syria all have a stake in Iraq’s future. Iran would clearly like Iraq to be a friendly neighbour under continued Shi‘i leadership. It wants Iraq to revive, but never again to be so powerful as to pose a threat as deadly as Saddam Hussein’s. Memories of the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war are still too recent. Iran would probably prefer Iraq to develop into a federal state, and therefore relatively weak, rather than a strong unitary state. There are, however, no illusions in Tehran that Iraq, a major Arab country with a strong nationalist tradition, will ever consent to be an Iranian puppet.

    Whoever wins the Iranian presidential elections on 12 June – whether it is the conservative incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or his principal challenger, former premier Mir-Hussein Mousavi, a ‘moderate’ conservative backed by the main reformist parties – the main lines of Iran’s external policy are unlikely to change: close ties with Syria, Iraq and Turkey; opposition to Sunni extremism in Afghanistan and Pakistan; support for Hizballah and the Palestinians; and continued uranium enrichment.

    What sort of Iraq, its neighbours wonder, will emerge from the slaughter, destruction and chaos of the past six years? Can a new regional balance be reached now that Iraq is again able to assert its national interests?

    It seems clear that Iraq has turned a corner. Violent deaths in May, at about 165, were among the lowest for any month since the U.S.-led invasion of 2003. Security is gradually returning, although still marred by horrendous suicide bombings. The Iraqi security forces – army, police, and intelligence — are steadily improving in size and efficiency. The recent conclusion of a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with the United States — with firm deadlines for the withdrawal of American armed forces — was an important expression of Iraqi sovereignty regained.

    But much remains to be done. Sunni-Shi‘i relations in Iraq remain tense, while Arab-Kurdish relations remain problematic; a hydrocarbons law has not yet been passed by parliament (although the central government has thought it best to turn a blind eye to the start of oil exports from the Kurdish region to Turkey.)

    War of Necessity, War of Choice, a recent book by Richard Haas contrasts the 1990 war to free Kuwait with the 2003 war to overthrow Saddam Hussein. The first, he argues was a war of necessity, the second a war of choice — and a very bad choice at that. It had a catastrophic impact on America’s armed forces, on its finances and its reputation. The Iraq war killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, displaced millions, shattered the country’s infrastructure, released sectarian demons, and upset the regional balance to Iran’s great benefit.

    Haas, a former senior American official, is now head of the prestigious New York–based Council on Foreign Relations. His book makes clear that Saddam’s alleged possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction was not the real motive for war. Pressure to attack Iraq came essentially from the civilian leadership at the Pentagon – especially from the then deputy defence secretary Paul Wolfowitz – and from other neo-cons in Vice-President Dick Cheney’s office, whose geopolitical fantasy was to overthrow the main Arab regimes, as well as the mullahs in Iran, and restructure the entire area, so as to make it safe for Israel.

    The neo-cons’ opportunity came because of America’s perceived need, after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, to send a big message to the Arab world about U.S. military power. Haas’ book is likely to revive the debate about the role of Israel’s friends in Washington in pushing the U.S. into war in Iraq. It will provide Barack Obama with ammunition to resist Israeli pressure to attack Iran.

    The grouping of Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria may not yet be a full-fledged alliance, but numerous common interests are pulling the four states in that direction. Not least is a concern about possible Israeli aggression – directed against Iran and Syria – and of continued uncertainty about the future course of American policy.

    Source:  www.daralhayat.com, 06 June 2009

  • Obama, Sarkozy disagree Turkey’s entry to EU

    Obama, Sarkozy disagree Turkey’s entry to EU

    AP foreign

    CAEN, France (AP) – €” President Barack Obama and French President Nicolas Sarkozy don’t see eye to eye on whether Turkey should be allowed to join the European Union.

    Obama supports EU membership for the largely Muslim country. Sarkozy (sahr-koh-ZEE’) opposes it.

    Obama says Turkey is an important NATO ally is helping with the war in Afghanistan. He says Turkey’s economy is growing and that the country wants closer relations with Europe — something Obama says he encourages.

    Sarkozy says he supports Turkey’s integration into Europe, but that he and Obama disagree on how to achieve it.

    The two leaders spoke at a news conference Saturday before D-Day celebrations in Normandy, France.

    Source: www.guardian.co.uk, June 7 2009

  • DEBKA file’s Exclusives in Week ending June 4, 2009

    DEBKA file’s Exclusives in Week ending June 4, 2009

    Untitled Document

    Muslim gang leader confesses to three-year old torture, murder of French Jew 29 May: Yousouf Fofana, leader of the self-styled Parisian “Gang of Barbarians,” has confessed at his trial to the brutal murder of Ilan Halimi, a 23-year old Jew, three years ago, after torturing him for 24 days. The anti-Semitic crime appalled the 600,000-strong French Jewish community, which accuses the government of still neglecting to curb the rising tide of anti-Semitism sweeping France.

    The trial is proceeding behind closed doors because two of the 26 accused were juveniles at the time.
    Halimi’s body was found in February 2006 at a Paris suburban railway station, naked, handcuffed and covered in burn marks from cigarettes. He died of stab wounds to his neck on the way to hospital.

    The victim’s mother Ruth Halimi has published a book about her son’s ordeal, comparing it to the kidnapping of Daniel Pearl, the American-Jewish journalist beheaded by Muslim terrorists in Pakistan in 2002.


    US failure to block North Korea’s nuclear armament is a lesson for Iran
    DEBKAfile Special Analysis
    30 May: “We will not stand idly by as North Korea builds the capability to wreak destruction on any target in the region or on us,” US defense secretary Robert Gates said in a speech Saturday, May 30. But he insisted the next step would be political, not military and called for stronger sanctions against internationally censured North Korea and Iran.

    DEBKAfile notes: Clearly, no military response is contemplated for now against North Korea, although Pyongyang has threatened military action against any attempts to stop and search its ships.

    Gates insisted that the “transfer of nuclear weapons or material by North Korea to states or non-state entities” would be a grave threat to the United States and its allies.” But he avoided mentioning North Korea’s blatant nuclear and missile transfers to Iran going back years.

    DEBKAfile’s Washington sources affirm that US President Barack Obama is preparing America and the world to accept the necessity of living with a nuclear-armed North Korea, with Tehran taking careful note.


    Hamas cells to launch full-blown West Bank terror war
    DEBKAfile Exclusive Report
    31 May: DEBKAfile’s military sources disclose that Sunday night, May 31, Hamas commanders in Damascus and Gaza ordered all West Bank cells to unleash a terrorist assault on the West Bank with bomb cars, roadside bombs, snipers and missiles. They were told to set their sights against all Palestinian Authority officials including Mahmoud Abbas as well as taking aim at Israeli cities north of Tel Aviv.

    Israel’s homeland defense authority was notified of Hamas’ declaration of war Sunday as it embarked on “Turning Point 3”, Israel’s largest civil defense exercise ever, designed to simulate simultaneous missile attacks from Iran, Syria, Hizballah from Lebanon and Hamas from the Gaza Strip.

    Hamas leaders’ decision to unleash violence was triggered by three events:

    1. In 48 hours, the fundamentalist Palestinian terrorists lost two top West Bank leaders in battle. Friday morning, May 29, an Israeli Border Guard counter-terror unit shot dead its Hebron commander when he resisted arrest.

    Two days later, a special Palestinian Authority unit killed Hamas’ northern Samaria commander after a seven-hour shootout in Qalqilya.

    2. They believe the Palestinian Authority US-trained security force directed by Gen. Keith Dayton is not up to much and easily blown away.

    3. Hamas is determined to scuttle Obama-Abbas cooperation and disrupt the US president’s forthcoming speech to Muslims from Cairo.


    May 31 Briefs:

    • Ex-Mossad officer Haggai Hadas appointed negotiator for Gilead Shalit.
      Ministerial legislative panel votes down Israel Beteinu’s Loyalty Bill. Thousands march in annual Salute to Israel parade on New York’s Fifth Avenue.
      Israel transport minister Katz: Government will not freeze legal settlement activity.
      Bomb defused on Iranian domestic passenger plane in more campaign violence.
      Israeli FM Lieberman to hold talks in Moscow with Russian president, prime minister.
      Barak heads to Washington to meet Gates, Jones, congressmen.
      Three Palestinian security men, three senior Hamas terrorists killed in firefightin Qalqilya, West Bank Saturday night.
      One was Hamas commander of N. West Bank.
      Civil defense drill Turning Point 3 begins Sunday for emergency teams and government offices.
      Tuesday, sirens to summon general public to shelters.
      Abbas tells Mubarak he is ready to restart peace talks by July.
      In Washington, Abbas said no talks until Netanyahu government toppled under US pressure.
      State funeral Sunday for Prof. Ephraim Katzir, fourth President of Israel.
      Ceremonies take place at the Weizmann Institution of Science, Rehovoth.
      Prof. Katzir who died aged 93, was internationally distinguished for achievements in biochemistry, biophysics.

    Enough fissile material for Iranian nuke by year’s end —AMAN officer 01 June: Brig. Gen. Yossi Baidatz, director of Israeli military intelligence (AMAN) research division estimates that Iran will have accumulated enough fissile material to build its first nuclear bomb by the end of this year.

    Iran’s nuclear clock, he said, is ticking away faster than international diplomacy. As he spoke, the country’s biggest civil defense exercise configured for possible rocket attacks from four directions, including Iran, coupled with a mega-terrorist attack, was in progress.


    Obama commits to close ties with Israel – but demands settlement freeze
    DEBKAfile Special Report
    02 June: Ahead of his speech of reconciliation to the Muslims world June 4, US president Barack Obama vowed to sustain close US ties with Israel but said the status quo in the region was “unsustainable” for Israel’s security.

    In a NPR interview Monday, June 1, he said: “We do have to retain a constant belief in… negotiations that will lead to peace” and “I’ve said that a freeze on settlements, including expansion to accommodate successive generations of settlers, is part of that.”
    Earlier Monday, prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that halting construction in West Bank settlements would be equal to “freezing life,” and, therefore, “unreasonable.”

    DEBKAfile’s Washington sources report that Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak has no hope of modifying administration’s tough stance on West Bank settlements and a Palestinians state during his current talks with US officials. Therefore the Netanyahu government’s strategy of skirting the real issues to avoid a clash will not work. He would do well to stop being defensive and stress that, even if every single settlement was removed from the West Bank, Iran would not stop developing nuclear weapons, the Taliban would not stop fighting, Hizballah would not be prevented from winning Lebanon’s general election, and Hamas would not give up its bid to capture the West Bank as its next terror base.


    Fellow Democrats in Congress criticize Obama’s tough stance on Israel 3 June: Some of President Barack Obama’s fellow Democrats in the US Congress have criticized him for “going beyond where it is appropriated for us to go in dealing with another democracy,” as Representative Anthony Weiner put it.

    His comments were echoed by other congressmen despite the staunch backing of Obama’s policy by the senior Democratic Party leadership.

    The Obama administration has repeatedly demanded that Israel commit to the creation of a Palestinian state and halt all settlement activity in the occupied West Bank and Jerusalem.

    Cont. Next Column

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who heads a largely right-wing cabinet, has so far refused to do both. “To say that a family that introduces a new child to their house can’t build a wing onto their home, I think goes beyond what I think should be U.S. policy,” Weiner told a news conference.

    New York Congressman Joseph Crowley said he was “very careful in questioning another democracy and the decisions that they make that would impose on their sovereignty.”

    Israel, he added, “has demonstrated over and over again her willingness to work towards a lasting peace within the Middle East.”


    French surveillance gear enabled Lebanon to crack alleged Israel spy rings
    DEBKAfile Exclusive Report
    3 June: DEBKAfile’s intelligence sources reveal that Lebanon is enabled to crack alleged Israeli spy rings by ultra-sophisticated surveillance equipment recently consigned to Lebanon by French intelligence services. French president Nicolas Sarkozy handed it over against a personal pledge from Lebanese president Michel Suleiman that it would be used exclusively against subversive Syrian and Hizballah targets to help him weather the June 7 general election.

    But General Suleiman broke his word. Gen. Ashraf Rifi, head of Lebanon’s General Security Office, had the top-notch surveillance devices installed to snoop on suspected Western and Israeli assets; Syrian or Hizballah agents were left with a clear run.

    Beirut has just passed its findings together with the captured electronic paraphernalia to Syrian and Iranian intelligence, handing them the data for overhauling their defenses against foreign espionage.


    Sarkozy strongly condemns Ahmadinejad’s new denial of the Holocaust 3 June: French President Nicolas Sarkozy issued Wednesday a strong condemnation of new remarks from Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad denying the Holocaust. He told Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki during a meeting in Paris that such comments were “unacceptable and profoundly shocking.”

    The extremist Ahmadinejad, who is seeking a second term in office, reiterated Wednesday that
    “The identity of the liberal democracy has been exposed to the world by its protection of the most criminal regime in the history of humanity, the Zionist regime, by using the big deception of the Holocaust.


    Obama arrives in Middle East to red carpet and al Qaeda threats
    DEBKAfile Special Report
    03 June: Received in Riyadh by King Abdullah and an honor guard, Barack Obama said: “I thought it was important to visit the place where Islam began.”
    DEBKAfile’s Middle East sources report that over and above the genuine warmth of the royal welcome and assent on the need for a new Middle East peace conference, Saudi leaders strongly disapprove of the US president’s insistence on dialogue with Tehran. Over last weekend, giant transports unloaded at Cairo airport a fleet of armored vehicles, White House helicopters, counter-terror weapons and the vanguard of the 3,000 Secret Service officers backed by CIA and FBI personnel who are securing the US president during his stay in Egypt. Many Cairenes chose to stay home as the city’s traffic was brought to a halt by security measures.

    Some 30,000 Egyptian security personnel including army units stationed in Cairo are on special duty until the American president leaves.

    His convoy will be escorted by vehicles equipped with sensors for detecting firearms and explosives and covered by Marine helicopters overhead.


    Bin Laden: Obama plants seeds of Muslim hatred for United States 3 June: Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden warned Americans “to be prepared to receive the consequences of the Obama and Bush administrations.” In a new recorded audiotape released by Arabic Al Jazeera TV Wednesday, June 3. he accused Obama of planting the seeds for “revenge and hatred” toward the United States in the Muslim world. Tuesday, his deputy, Ayman Zawahiri, called on Egyptians to confront the “criminal” Barack Obama whose “bloody messages” to Muslims have been received… and would not be covered by “public relations campaigns or theatrical visits or polished words.”


    Obama reshuffles America’s Middle East allies
    DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis
    4 June: In his two day stay in the Middle East, crowned by a speech from Cairo to the world’s Muslims on June 4, US president Barack Obama held private talks with Saudi King Abdullah and Hosni Mubarak in which he cemented a new coalition between the US, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, DEBKAfile’s Middle East sources report. The three nations forged their first strategic bond ever to combat Islamic radicalism, chiefly al Qaeda and Taliban, and applying the brakes to Iran’s drive for a nuclear weapon.

    Thursday, Osama bin Laden warned Muslims that “alliances with Christians and Jews would turn them into apostates.”

    This seismic transformation means that President Obama proposes to gradually minimize America’s strategic ties. Instead of conferring with Israel on America’s military and undercover moves the Middle East and Muslim world, Washington will focus its teamwork on Cairo and Riyadh. Obama seeks to enter into negotiations with Iran unencumbered by Israeli baggage. The same applies to Obama’s talks with Arab and Muslim governments such as Syria, which he wants to harness to his new Arab line-up.
    When he said in his epic speech “America will align its policies with those who seek peace,” he was saying that his hands are free to henceforth pick and choose US allies without being bound by the past.


    Obama raps Israel, Palestinians, Arabs for Middle East stalemate 4 June: The US president Barack Obama stressed the need for mutual respect and tolerance among the world’s faiths, denigrated al Qaeda and extremism, said the US “does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements,” will respect all elected peaceful governments provided they respect their peoples, and called for universal human and women’s rights to be upheld. His much awaited speech to more than a billion Muslims which quoted extensively from the Koran, but also the Bible and the Talmud, won cheers from the selected 3,000 strong audience in Cairo University’s Great Hall Thursday, June 4.

    Along with a declaration that the US bond with Israel is unbreakable, President Obama demanded that Israel and the Palestinians uphold their obligations to the roadmap. “America will align its policies with those who seek peace – Israelis, Palestinians or Arabs,” he declared. Israel must let Palestinians live a normal life in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, he said, but they must abandon violence.

    Rockets on sleeping children or bombs killing old people on a bus are intolerable, but the US does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements and Israel must recognize the Palestinian right to dignity and a state of their own, but so must the Arab world recognize Israel.

    Obama began his speech by saying: “I have come to Cairo to seek a new beginning of mutual respect between America and Muslims: Salaam Aleikum.” America and Islam are not mutually exclusive; they share common principles.” Muslims have enriched America in many fields.

    But no one should tolerate al Qaeda which killed members

  • Formula One: Brilliant Button on top in Turkey

    Formula One: Brilliant Button on top in Turkey

    f1By Sean Chaney

    Brawn’s Jenson Button coasted to a comfortable sixth win in seven races so far this season with a dominant display at Istanbul Park.

    The championship leader got past pole-sitter Sebastian Vettel when the Red Bull ran wide on the exit of Turn Nine on the very first lap of the race.

    Vettel finished third behind team-mate Mark Webber while Toyota’s Jarno Trulli drove solidly to end up fourth.

    McLaren’s world champion Lewis Hamilton battled hard to finish in 13th.

    Williams’s Nico Rosberg was fifth, while Ferrari’s Felipe Massa, BMW Sauber’s Robert Kubica and Toyota’s Timo Glock filled the remaining points places down to eighth.

    The crucial moment of the race was Vettal’s early error that allowed Button to get past him.

    Button then built up a commanding lead of almost 12 seconds before his first pit stop, which forced Vettel into a three stop strategy as he took a lighter fuel load on board in a bid to reduce Button’s lead.

    This meant that Vettel had to stop three times and his Red Bull team-mate Mark Webber took advantage to move up into second position.

    BBC 

  • Full transcript of Obama’s speech at Cairo University

    Full transcript of Obama’s speech at Cairo University

    Türkçe Çevirisi (Turkish)

    Full transcript of US President B. H. Obama’s speech at Cairo University, 4 June 2009.

    press_office/Remarks-by- the-President- at-Cairo-University-6-04-09/

    Ed. Note: The State Department has been busy translating the President’s speech, click here to find links to translated transcripts, and later versions of the video with translated captions as they come in. Languages will include Arabic, Chinese, Dari, French, Hebrew, Hindi, Indonesian, Malay, Pashto, Persian, Punjabi, Russian, Turkish, and Urdu.

    ************ ********* *****

    THE WHITE HOUSE

    Office of the Press Secretary
    (Cairo,Egypt)

    ________________________________________________
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE               June 4, 2009
     

    REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT 
    ON A NEW BEGINNING

    Cairo University 
    Cairo, Egypt
    1:10 P.M. (Local)
    PRESIDENT OBAMA:  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 attacks 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 self-interested 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 attack 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 attitudes 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 attack, 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 better 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 better 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 attacks 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 settlements.  (Applause.)  This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace.  It is time for these settlements 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 hostage-taking 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 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.

    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 committed 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.

    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.

    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 better 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 written.

    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.)

    END        
    2:05 P.M. (Local)

  • Call for Submissions: “Islam, modernity and democracy: theoretical debates and case studies”

    Call for Submissions: “Islam, modernity and democracy: theoretical debates and case studies”

    Call for Submissions for a Special Issue on “Islam, modernity and democracy: theoretical debates and case studies”

    Insight Turkey

    Insight Turkey invites manuscripts for its Fall 2009 issue that will explore the debate around the relationship between ‘Islam, modernity and democracy’ with theoretical reflections and analyses of the democratization experiences in the Islamic world, particularly the Middle East . We seek original manuscripts from scholars across the social sciences and humanities, both discipline specific and interdisciplinary, as well as contributions from policy circles. In this special issue, which will be edited by the guest editor Dr. Ahmet Kuru of Columbia University , our goal is to showcase high-quality single case or comparative studies and stimulate a lively debate on the subject.


    The topics suitable for inclusion in the special issue include but are not limited to:

    –     theoretical analyses on Islam, modernity and democracy,

    –     the experience of liberalization and democratization in the Middle East ,

    –     the role of external actors in democratization: the policies of the European Union and the United States .


    Covered by major indexing and abstracting systems and databases Insight Turkey is a refereed academic journal with a policy-oriented perspective. All submissions are subject to Insight Turkey ’s editorial policy and must follow the journal’s style guidelines, which can be obtained from the journal’s homepage. Since the journal’s readership comprises specialists and non-specialists, authors should avoid jargon where possible and use a clear and straightforward language that is appealing to both groups.


    Insight Turkey welcomes both full articles (5,000-6,000-word essays that present the findings of research or analysis on a relevant contemporary and historical problem or phenomenon) and commentaries (2,500-3,500 word pieces that make a short, provocative argument on an actual topic of interest with policy relevance).


    The deadline for submission of completed papers is September 15, 2009. Interested authors are encouraged to send a 300-word abstract to the journal editors no later than August 15, 2009.


    Submissions and any questions on editorial issues should be directed to editors at insight@insightturkey.com. General information regarding Insight Turkey may be obtained from its website:

    INSIGHT TURKEY IS INDEXED AND ABSTRACTED BY

    Index Islamicus, IBR, IBSS, International Political Science Abstracts, Left Index, Middle East & Central Asian Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences Bibliographies, Sociological Abstracts and Worldwide Political Science Abstracts.

    Insight Turkey
    Resit Galip Cad. Hereke Sokak No: 10
    GOP/Cankaya, 06700 Ankara , Turkey
    Tel: +90.312.446-51 13 • Fax: +90.312.405-6903
    E-mail: insight@insightturkey.com

    web: www.insightturkey.com