Islamic Societies Review WEEKLY

Wednesday, September 26, 2012

President of Yemen Abdrabuh Mansour Hadi Mansour, UNGA 2012

Wednesday, September 26, 2012 No comments

President of Yemen Abdrabuh Mansour Hadi Mansour, UNGA 2012

Statement Summary:

ABDRABUH MANSOUR HADI MANSOUR, President of Yemen, said in recent weeks there had been a wave of outrage in the Islamic world against a recent film that contained “explicit denigrations” of the Prophet Muhammad. It was deplorable that there had been a deliberate campaign of insults to Islam to taint its image and plant seeds of animosity. Despite that campaign, the behaviour had been justified as part of freedom of expression. Those people overlooked the fact that there should be limits to such freedom, especially if it was used to blaspheme the beliefs of nations. He strongly denounced the film, while also calling for an enhanced understanding between different religions and cultures, and for the adoption of international legislation to prevent further abuses of the right to freedom of expression. Denouncing violence and incitement, which was contradictory to true Islam, he called for adherence to peaceful expressions of opinion.

Heralding Yemen’s fiftieth anniversary of its 1962 revolution and its forty-ninth anniversary of its 1963 revolution, he noted his country’s peaceful transfer of power for the first time in its recent history. The “historical achievement”, he said, demonstrated his country’s determination to end an autocratic regime and establish a republican government with a constitution that represented a “new social contract between the State and its people”. As one of the “Arab Spring” countries, he lauded the disputing parties’ ability to reach an agreement and political settlement under the Gulf Cooperation Council Initiative, thus avoiding a “catastrophic” outcome. Early presidential elections were conducted, granting the new authority full legitimacy to fulfil the Initiative provisions and lead Yemen into a “brighter future” where its citizens could freely “choose their rulers”.

Continuing, he said that the National Dialogue Conference in Yemen that would tackle pending problems and concerns was open for all Yemeni parties and would be a means to achieve national reconciliation. Noting the current political arrangements, including the implementation of the settlement agreement and the Security Council resolutions 2014 (2011) and 2051 (2012), he pointed out that, although there were many political, economic, security and social obstacles facing his country, the Yemeni people would be undeterred in their efforts to join the twenty-first century. In that regard, it was necessary to adopt an “overarching vision” that would take into account the historical and geographical components of Yemen, including the strategic location of Yemen on trade routes and international sea navigation.

Terrorism, he noted, had pervaded his country for more than 10 years, threatening local, regional and international peace and stability. Regardless of the recent victories by Yemeni armed forces over Al-Qaida, he urged that the terrorist organization not be underestimated. He drew attention to the humanitarian crisis that resulted from terrorism in Sadah and the recent events of the past year that displaced more than 500,000 people from their homes, in addition to the increasing number of refugees from the Horn of Africa region. The United Nations appeal had asked for some $600 million, but it had been only about half funded. He called for support from “brotherly and friendly countries” to respond to the appeal so that the basic needs of displaced people and refugees could be addressed.

Concluding, he said that it was deplorable that six decades after the General Assembly issued the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, many nations still suffered human rights violations, such as the Palestinian people by the Israeli Government’s activities, the violence against thousands of civilians in Syria and the “racial cleansing” of Muslims in Myanmar. He congratulated the Somali people for their successful peaceful transfer of power and the election of a new president in a democratic environment, noting the “deep, historical relations” Yemen shared with Somalia. However, with the continued influx of migrants and asylum seekers from Somalia into his country, national security, peace and stability was threatened. He called for the international community to “share this burden” with Yemen, especially since his country’s own resources were “exhausted”.

President Asif Ali Zardari, at UNGA, 25 September 2012

Wednesday, September 26, 2012 No comments

President Asif Ali Zardari, at UNGA, 25 September 2012

ASIF ALI ZARDARI, President of Pakistan, said his country had gone above and beyond the call of duty in fulfilling its international responsibilities. It had consistently been among the top contributors of troops to United Nations peacekeeping operations for many years, and today, more than 10,000 of its forces wore the blue helmets in the service of people around the world. Furthermore, Pakistan’s election to the Security Council reflected its commitment to world peace and security, as well as the international community’s vote of confidence. The United Nations represented common aspirations for peace and development, but it needed reform, he said. It must become more democratic and accountable. The legitimate aspirations of any people should be accommodated peacefully and in a manner consistent with sovereignty and territorial integrity, he said, adding that Pakistan supported the right of the Palestinian people to an independent State and to the admission of Palestine as a full member of the United Nations.

He recalled the loss of more than 7,000 soldiers and policemen, over 37,000 civilians, and several Government officials, including Pakistan’s first elected female Prime Minister and his wife, Benazir Bhutto, to extremism. Terrorism and extremism had destroyed human lives, torn the country’s social fabric, and devastated its economy, he said, adding that he was present not to answer, but to ask questions on behalf of his people whose lives had been lost to terrorism. Turning to Afghanistan, he said Pakistan’s doors had been open to its Afghan brothers and sisters but it had been left to fend for itself and its Afghan guests. Recalling the dictatorial regimes that were responsible for suffocating and throttling Pakistan, its institutions and its democracy, he called attention to the judicial execution of Pakistan’s first elected leader, Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, the jailing of other elected leaders, the 12 years he had himself spent in prison, and the billions provided by the international community to support those dictatorships.

The country’s social fabric and its very character had been altered, he said, adding that “our condition today is a product of dictatorships”. No country and no people had suffered more than Pakistan in the struggle against terrorism. How much more suffering could it endure? Describing how democracy had brought about major changes in his country, he listed the completion of a full five-year term by the first civilian Government in Pakistan’s 66-year history; the passage of unprecedented reforms by Parliament; the restoration of the 1973 consensus Constitution; and the establishment of the National Commission on Women, the National Commission on Human Rights, and a truly Independent Election Commission to ensure free, fair and transparent elections. The media were free and uncensored and civil society was flourishing under the protection of democracy, he said. Millions of families had also benefited from the Benazir Income Support Programme, the first social safety net created with the support of Pakistani women, for the weak and less privileged. It had not only helped the poor, but also empowered women in their households, he said.

As evidence of its cooperation with other countries in the region, he said Pakistan had begun to engage at all levels of the Afghan political spectrum. Believing in a sovereign, stable and secure Afghanistan, he said “what is good for the Afghan people is good for Pakistan”. He stressed the need for the international community to support the 3 million Afghan refugees in his country, so they could return home with dignity. Similarly, Pakistan’s relations with India, based on mutual trust and communication, were growing, he said, adding that he had been was encouraged by his discussions with the Prime Minister of India, with whom he had met last month in Tehran — their fifth meeting in four years. On the territorial dispute between the two countries, he stressed Pakistan’s continuing support for the right of the people of Jammu and Kashmir peacefully to choose their destiny, in accordance with the Security Council’s long-standing resolutions on that matter. Kashmir remained a symbol of the failures of the United Nations system rather than its strengths, he said, emphasizing that the resolution of those issues could only be reached in an environment of cooperation. To further build regional cooperation, Pakistan would be hosting a quadrilateral summit next month, and signing the Afghan-Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement, he said.

King Abdullah II Bin Al Hussein, King at UNGA, 25 September 2012

Wednesday, September 26, 2012 No comments

King Abdullah II Bin Al Hussein, King at UNGA, 25 September 2012

ABDULLAH II, King of Jordan, welcomed world leaders of many religions who had stood with Muslims worldwide in rejecting provocations meant to divide those of different faiths. He condemned all acts vilifying the Prophet Muhammad or falsely using his name — or that of Islam — to justify violence. “There are no sidelines on this issue,” he stressed. Every faith everywhere must be proactive in promoting understanding, he said, adding that the first four words of the United Nations Charter — “To unite our strength” — were not just an old dream, but “a modern urgency”. The United Nations was needed as never before.

He said important tasks ahead in the Middle East involved providing better opportunities, especially for young people, averting regional instability and fulfilling the basic human right to live in freedom, dignity, justice and peace. Jordan, for its part, was guided by mutual respect and moderation in its “Arab Spring” journey to accelerate home-grown reforms and achieve national goals. Since 2011, constitutional amendments and new laws had created a matrix of institutions and principles that supported democratization, he said, adding that Jordan would have a new Parliament next year.

Turning to the tragic situation in Syria, he said the violence must end immediately and a transition must begin now. There was no alternative to a political solution that would end the bloodshed, restore security and preserve both Syria’s territorial integrity and the dignity of its people. Jordan would support the new Special Representative of the Arab League and the United Nations. More than 200,000 Syrians had sought refuge in Jordan since the beginning of the crisis, and while that had put pressure on its economy, the country would continue to shoulder that responsibility, he said, adding that international support was essential.

As for the crisis at the heart of the region, he said Palestinians had been the exception to the United Nations promise of shelter under international law, the dignity of living in freedom and security, and the right to self-determination. No issue stirred more anger than telling an entire people that they did not count when it came to global justice. The “Arab Summer” could not bear its full fruit until the Palestinian-Israeli conflict ended with a just peace and a Palestinian State, living side-by-side with a secure Israel. Illegal settlement-building and unilateral actions threatened a negotiated peace. Jordan was also extremely concerned about threats to Jerusalem and the sanctity of its Muslim and Christian holy sites.

With Al-Aqsa Mosque and Compound under Hashemite custodianship and protected by international law as occupied territory, he warned, any invasion or division of Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa would be viewed not only as a breach of Israel’s obligations, but as a profound religious transgression. A clear message must be sent that such actions would not be tolerated. The world could not afford continuing hostility. There was a potential opportunity after elections in the United States to achieve a solution that would see two States at peace — Palestine and Israel — secure and free to look forward on the basis of a just, comprehensive and final settlement. “The Arab world is seeking peace, real peace”, involving diplomatic and economic relations, and a new normality wherein people would be safe in their homes. That prospect had been on offer since 2002 under the Arab Peace Initiative, through which 57 Arab and Muslim countries had reached out to Israel, he noted, emphasizing that it was time for Israel to turn around and make peace with the Palestinians. Almost three generations after the creation of the United Nations, it was not enough simply to make the right choices. “We must also pursue effective action.”

Turkey's Erdogan to consolidate grip as ruling party renews

Wednesday, September 26, 2012 No comments

By Nick Tattersall and Can Sezer

Erdoğan gives a thumbs-up sign from
the cockpit of the Turkish Primary
and Basic Trainer Aircraft "Hürkus"
(Photo: Reuters)

KONYA, Turkey, Sept 26 (Reuters) - Surveying the street lights sparkling like jewels on the plain below, Tahir Akyurek looks back with satisfaction on his first eight years as mayor of this central Turkish city.

Two-lane highways have been widened to six, a fast train line has put Ankara just an hour and a half away, and there is a new park where students and the elderly chat over tea or wander among pristine lawns in the shadow of elegant minarets.

More so than the teeming streets of cosmopolitan Istanbul, the ordered avenues of Ankara or the resorts of the Aegean and Mediterranean coasts, this conservative industrial city on the Anatolian plateau epitomises the reformist ambitions of Turkey's ruling Justice and Development (AK) Party.

"Konya is connected with its traditions and embraces the new ... Being conservative, being devoted to tradition, does not mean being reactionary," Akyurek told Reuters, sipping tea and chewing almonds on a cafe terrace overlooking the city.

His sentiments reflect the self-image of the Islamist-rooted AK Party as it prepares for its biggest overhaul since sweeping to power in Turkey a decade ago. Critics are less charitable, viewing it as a threat to the modern secular republic founded by Kemal Ataturk on the ruins of the Ottoman Empire 90 years ago.

read more >>

Tuesday, September 25, 2012

Senegal: H.E. Mr. Macky Sall, President at UN General Assembly 2012

Tuesday, September 25, 2012 No comments

Senegal: H.E. Mr. Macky Sall, President at UN General Assembly 2012

MACKY SALL, President of Senegal, said organized and heavily armed terrorist groups had illegally occupied two thirds of neighbouring Mali, sowing despair among the population and destroying World Cultural Heritage sites. Northern Mali had become a lawless area, a safe haven for the recruitment and training of international terrorists, who wrongly used Islam as a pretext to disguise their criminal activities and sought to attack foreign interests, as well as reach other parts of the world. He called on the Security Council to end the occupation, authorize action against the terrorist groups, and restore Mali’s territorial integrity, “otherwise the Security Council will not have lived up to its responsibilities”.

Opposed to any partition of Mali, he also condemned the 22 March 2012 military coup and stressed that “in Africa as elsewhere, the place of the army is in the barracks, under the command of a civilian authority”. Turning to the situation in Guinea-Bissau, another neighbouring country, he expressed appreciation for the efforts of the transitional Government to effect national reconciliation, re-establish institutions, organize credible elections and withdraw the army from the political arena. Faced with faithless and lawless foreign drug traffickers, Guinea-Bissau deserved the attention and support of the international community, he stressed.

Speaking as Chair of the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People, he restated that body’s support for the creation of a viable and independent Palestinian State with East Jerusalem as its capital, saying that “is one of our oldest promises we have not yet fulfilled”. In the interest of all peoples of the region and the world, “it is high time that the Holy Land of the three revealed religions no longer be a land of fire, blood and tears, because the light of wisdom emanating from its spiritual calling makes it instead a land of peace and human fraternity”.

Describing a “paradox of modern times”, he said “never before in human history had the world accumulated so much wealth, but never before in human history has the world counted so many poor”. What kind of world did people want “when it is a proven fact that continuous environmental degradation as a result of human action threatens to jeopardize living conditions on earth”? According to Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates, more than 900 million people suffered undernourishment when agriculture had the potential to feed more than twice the planet’s population, he noted.

Meanwhile, millions of human beings in Africa’s towns and villages had no access to basic social services and millions of women died in childbirth, he said. At the same time, millions of young people, after years of studies, efforts and sacrifices, only found, instead of accomplished dreams, the nightmare of unemployment and indignation as an outlet for their distress. Millions of workers, fathers and mothers earning the minimum wage, suddenly found themselves out of work because their companies had gone bankrupt and the people responsible had gotten off scot-free with a “golden parachute” as compensation.

Stressing the need to redefine priorities, invest in the economy and agree on a new and fairer world order, he declared: “The African continent, which has endured centuries of slavery and exploitation, cannot afford to […] give over its resources in a competition that would push it further to the margins of progress and well-being,” he said, calling for another way of relating to Africa, one based on a more equitable partnership and which took into account the priorities and interests of all, not only at the United Nations, but also in NEPAD, the Group of Eight (G-8), the G-20 and other forums. Senegal, for its part, would focus on agriculture, infrastructure and energy to ensure a path of progress and improve the lives of its citizens, he said.

Amir of Qatar at UN General Assembly 2012

Tuesday, September 25, 2012 No comments

Amir of Qatar at UN General Assembly 2012

SHEIKH HAMAD BIN KHALIFA AL-THANI, Amir of Qatar, said that the Arab world was currently weathering a period that was “difficult and risky” and at the same time offered the prospects of hope. Indeed, the current tremors were an impressive attempt to correct prevailing conditions in the region at a time when the entire world was changing rapidly. The unprecedented Arab experience was proving vastly different from previous transitions that had occurred elsewhere, and even if from afar the conditions seemed troubling or “filled with flames and smoke”, he assured delegations that what they were hearing and seeing was in fact a region struggling to cope with the times and overcome obstacles that had hampered its march forward. The region was, at last, taking matters into its own hands after having suffered years of dictatorship, dependence and corruption.

Recalling that the American political and social experience had risen from the ashes of civil war, and that Europe had gone through terrible world wars before achieving a degree of unity that could not be attained by arms or hegemony, he said that the events in the Arab region were “natural and historic”. He said that people could not attain freedom by merely asking for it and history was replete with examples of people risking their lives and wealth for liberty. At the same time, it required resistance to depose dictators and hard work to overcome backwardness. Further, occupied territories could never be restored simply by merely rejecting occupation. It required persistence in demanding rights and resistance through all legitimate means.

What made the situation so unique in his region was that Arabs and Muslims had high aspirations and that the changes were occurring “under the spotlights […] and satellites” and under the influence of electronic media without any barriers. Along with others in the region and beyond, Qatar had recognized the risk of the current events in the Arab world. “If we would ask for something in this session, it would be the renewed encouragement that confirms the rights of our Arab world to continue its advancement and achieve its aspirations in a new world influenced by science and technology,” that the pioneers that had written our well-known conventions on rights and freedoms could never have foreseen.

At the same time, he hoped that delegations gathered for the general debate would sympathize with the historical transformations under way in the Arab world. That would reassure peoples who were marching with determination towards “a place fit for them in history” with the hope of a better tomorrow for future generations. Turning to the “unacceptable” situation in Syria, he said that hundreds of people were being killed every day under fire from a regime that did not hesitate to use weapons against its citizens. All international efforts, including by the Security Council, had failed to pull Syria out of the current cycle of violence, so he believed it was better for “Arab countries themselves to interfere, out of the national, humanitarian, political and military duties” to the region, and to do what was necessary to stop the bloodshed in Syria.

He said that, despite the suffering in specific countries, the core problem in the Middle East remained the Palestinian question, including the ongoing Israeli occupation of Arab territories throughout the region and the stifling blockade imposed on the Gaza Strip. The peace process was at a stalemate because Israel continued to expand its settlements in the Palestinian Occupied Territory and East Jerusalem. Sometimes, he asked why the international community did not do more to implement countless resolutions on the issue and why the Security Council would not adopt a Chapter VII resolution forcing Israel to end the blockade, halt settlement construction and return to peace talks. His question remained unanswered.

Finally, while expressing strong support for freedom of expression, he reiterated his belief that such liberties should not be used as tools to hurt or insult others. To that end, he urged a balance between the respect for sacred faiths and religions and the freedom of expression so that stereotypes would be rejected and tolerance would trump intolerance. He called on the United Nations and concerned parties to start the process of elaborating “laws, procedures and controls to prevent insulting religions and faiths under any pretext, and, at the same time, keep the rights of man to know and express his opinion.”

Remarks by the President to the UN General Assembly

Tuesday, September 25, 2012 No comments

United Nations Headquarters

New York, New York

10:22 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Mr. President, Mr. Secretary General, fellow delegates, ladies and gentleman: I would like to begin today by telling you about an American named Chris Stevens.

Chris was born in a town called Grass Valley, California, the son of a lawyer and a musician. As a young man, Chris joined the Peace Corps, and taught English in Morocco. And he came to love and respect the people of North Africa and the Middle East. He would carry that commitment throughout his life. As a diplomat, he worked from Egypt to Syria, from Saudi Arabia to Libya. He was known for walking the streets of the cities where he worked -- tasting the local food, meeting as many people as he could, speaking Arabic, listening with a broad smile.

Chris went to Benghazi in the early days of the Libyan revolution, arriving on a cargo ship. As America’s representative, he helped the Libyan people as they coped with violent conflict, cared for the wounded, and crafted a vision for the future in which the rights of all Libyans would be respected. And after the revolution, he supported the birth of a new democracy, as Libyans held elections, and built new institutions, and began to move forward after decades of dictatorship.

Chris Stevens loved his work. He took pride in the country he served, and he saw dignity in the people that he met. And two weeks ago, he traveled to Benghazi to review plans to establish a new cultural center and modernize a hospital. That’s when America’s compound came under attack. Along with three of his colleagues, Chris was killed in the city that he helped to save. He was 52 years old.

I tell you this story because Chris Stevens embodied the best of America. Like his fellow Foreign Service officers, he built bridges across oceans and cultures, and was deeply invested in the international cooperation that the United Nations represents. He acted with humility, but he also stood up for a set of principles -- a belief that individuals should be free to determine their own destiny, and live with liberty, dignity, justice, and opportunity.

The attacks on the civilians in Benghazi were attacks on America. We are grateful for the assistance we received from the Libyan government and from the Libyan people. There should be no doubt that we will be relentless in tracking down the killers and bringing them to justice. And I also appreciate that in recent days, the leaders of other countries in the region -- including Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen -- have taken steps to secure our diplomatic facilities, and called for calm. And so have religious authorities around the globe.

But understand, the attacks of the last two weeks are not simply an assault on America. They are also an assault on the very ideals upon which the United Nations was founded -- the notion that people can resolve their differences peacefully; that diplomacy can take the place of war; that in an interdependent world, all of us have a stake in working towards greater opportunity and security for our citizens.

If we are serious about upholding these ideals, it will not be enough to put more guards in front of an embassy, or to put out statements of regret and wait for the outrage to pass. If we are serious about these ideals, we must speak honestly about the deeper causes of the crisis -- because we face a choice between the forces that would drive us apart and the hopes that we hold in common.

Today, we must reaffirm that our future will be determined by people like Chris Stevens -- and not by his killers. Today, we must declare that this violence and intolerance has no place among our United Nations.

It has been less than two years since a vendor in Tunisia set himself on fire to protest the oppressive corruption in his country, and sparked what became known as the Arab Spring. And since then, the world has been captivated by the transformation that’s taken place, and the United States has supported the forces of change.

We were inspired by the Tunisian protests that toppled a dictator, because we recognized our own beliefs in the aspiration of men and women who took to the streets.

We insisted on change in Egypt, because our support for democracy ultimately put us on the side of the people.

We supported a transition of leadership in Yemen, because the interests of the people were no longer being served by a corrupt status quo.

We intervened in Libya alongside a broad coalition, and with the mandate of the United Nations Security Council, because we had the ability to stop the slaughter of innocents, and because we believed that the aspirations of the people were more powerful than a tyrant.

And as we meet here, we again declare that the regime of Bashar al-Assad must come to an end so that the suffering of the Syrian people can stop and a new dawn can begin.

We have taken these positions because we believe that freedom and self-determination are not unique to one culture. These are not simply American values or Western values -- they are universal values. And even as there will be huge challenges to come with a transition to democracy, I am convinced that ultimately government of the people, by the people, and for the people is more likely to bring about the stability, prosperity, and individual opportunity that serve as a basis for peace in our world.

So let us remember that this is a season of progress. For the first time in decades, Tunisians, Egyptians and Libyans voted for new leaders in elections that were credible, competitive, and fair. This democratic spirit has not been restricted to the Arab world. Over the past year, we’ve seen peaceful transitions of power in Malawi and Senegal, and a new President in Somalia. In Burma, a President has freed political prisoners and opened a closed society, a courageous dissident has been elected to parliament, and people look forward to further reform. Around the globe, people are making their voices heard, insisting on their innate dignity, and the right to determine their future.

And yet the turmoil of recent weeks reminds us that the path to democracy does not end with the casting of a ballot. Nelson Mandela once said: "To be free is not merely to cast off one’s chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others." (Applause.)

True democracy demands that citizens cannot be thrown in jail because of what they believe, and that businesses can be opened without paying a bribe. It depends on the freedom of citizens to speak their minds and assemble without fear, and on the rule of law and due process that guarantees the rights of all people.

In other words, true democracy -- real freedom -- is hard work. Those in power have to resist the temptation to crack down on dissidents. In hard economic times, countries must be tempted -- may be tempted to rally the people around perceived enemies, at home and abroad, rather than focusing on the painstaking work of reform.

Moreover, there will always be those that reject human progress -- dictators who cling to power, corrupt interests that depend on the status quo, and extremists who fan the flames of hate and division. From Northern Ireland to South Asia, from Africa to the Americas, from the Balkans to the Pacific Rim, we’ve witnessed convulsions that can accompany transitions to a new political order.

At time, the conflicts arise along the fault lines of race or tribe. And often they arise from the difficulties of reconciling tradition and faith with the diversity and interdependence of the modern world. In every country, there are those who find different religious beliefs threatening; in every culture, those who love freedom for themselves must ask themselves how much they’re willing to tolerate freedom for others.

That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity.

It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well -- for as the city outside these walls makes clear, we are a country that has welcomed people of every race and every faith. We are home to Muslims who worship across our country. We not only respect the freedom of religion, we have laws that protect individuals from being harmed because of how they look or what they believe. We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them.

I know there are some who ask why we don’t just ban such a video. And the answer is enshrined in our laws: Our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech.

Here in the United States, countless publications provoke offense. Like me, the majority of Americans are Christian, and yet we do not ban blasphemy against our most sacred beliefs. As President of our country and Commander-in-Chief of our military, I accept that people are going to call me awful things every day -- (laughter) -- and I will always defend their right to do so. (Applause.)

Americans have fought and died around the globe to protect the right of all people to express their views, even views that we profoundly disagree with. We do not do so because we support hateful speech, but because our founders understood that without such protections, the capacity of each individual to express their own views and practice their own faith may be threatened. We do so because in a diverse society, efforts to restrict speech can quickly become a tool to silence critics and oppress minorities.

We do so because given the power of faith in our lives, and the passion that religious differences can inflame, the strongest weapon against hateful speech is not repression; it is more speech -- the voices of tolerance that rally against bigotry and blasphemy, and lift up the values of understanding and mutual respect.

Now, I know that not all countries in this body share this particular understanding of the protection of free speech. We recognize that. But in 2012, at a time when anyone with a cell phone can spread offensive views around the world with the click of a button, the notion that we can control the flow of information is obsolete. The question, then, is how do we respond?

And on this we must agree: There is no speech that justifies mindless violence. (Applause.) There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents. There's no video that justifies an attack on an embassy. There's no slander that provides an excuse for people to burn a restaurant in Lebanon, or destroy a school in Tunis, or cause death and destruction in Pakistan.

In this modern world with modern technologies, for us to respond in that way to hateful speech empowers any individual who engages in such speech to create chaos around the world. We empower the worst of us if that’s how we respond.

More broadly, the events of the last two weeks also speak to the need for all of us to honestly address the tensions between the West and the Arab world that is moving towards democracy.

Now, let me be clear: Just as we cannot solve every problem in the world, the United States has not and will not seek to dictate the outcome of democratic transitions abroad. We do not expect other nations to agree with us on every issue, nor do we assume that the violence of the past weeks or the hateful speech by some individuals represent the views of the overwhelming majority of Muslims, any more than the views of the people who produced this video represents those of Americans. However, I do believe that it is the obligation of all leaders in all countries to speak out forcefully against violence and extremism. (Applause.)

It is time to marginalize those who -- even when not directly resorting to violence -- use hatred of America, or the West, or Israel, as the central organizing principle of politics. For that only gives cover, and sometimes makes an excuse, for those who do resort to violence.

That brand of politics -- one that pits East against West, and South against North, Muslims against Christians and Hindu and Jews -- can’t deliver on the promise of freedom. To the youth, it offers only false hope. Burning an American flag does nothing to provide a child an education. Smashing apart a restaurant does not fill an empty stomach. Attacking an embassy won’t create a single job. That brand of politics only makes it harder to achieve what we must do together: educating our children, and creating the opportunities that they deserve; protecting human rights, and extending democracy’s promise.

Understand America will never retreat from the world. We will bring justice to those who harm our citizens and our friends, and we will stand with our allies. We are willing to partner with countries around the world to deepen ties of trade and investment, and science and technology, energy and development -- all efforts that can spark economic growth for all our people and stabilize democratic change.

But such efforts depend on a spirit of mutual interest and mutual respect. No government or company, no school or NGO will be confident working in a country where its people are endangered. For partnerships to be effective our citizens must be secure and our efforts must be welcomed.

A politics based only on anger -- one based on dividing the world between "us" and "them" -- not only sets back international cooperation, it ultimately undermines those who tolerate it. All of us have an interest in standing up to these forces.

Let us remember that Muslims have suffered the most at the hands of extremism. On the same day our civilians were killed in Benghazi, a Turkish police officer was murdered in Istanbul only days before his wedding; more than 10 Yemenis were killed in a car bomb in Sana’a; several Afghan children were mourned by their parents just days after they were killed by a suicide bomber in Kabul.

The impulse towards intolerance and violence may initially be focused on the West, but over time it cannot be contained. The same impulses toward extremism are used to justify war between Sunni and Shia, between tribes and clans. It leads not to strength and prosperity but to chaos. In less than two years, we have seen largely peaceful protests bring more change to Muslim-majority countries than a decade of violence. And extremists understand this. Because they have nothing to offer to improve the lives of people, violence is their only way to stay relevant. They don’t build; they only destroy.

It is time to leave the call of violence and the politics of division behind. On so many issues, we face a choice between the promise of the future, or the prisons of the past. And we cannot afford to get it wrong. We must seize this moment. And America stands ready to work with all who are willing to embrace a better future.

The future must not belong to those who target Coptic Christians in Egypt -- it must be claimed by those in Tahrir Square who chanted, "Muslims, Christians, we are one." The future must not belong to those who bully women -- it must be shaped by girls who go to school, and those who stand for a world where our daughters can live their dreams just like our sons. (Applause.)

The future must not belong to those corrupt few who steal a country’s resources -- it must be won by the students and entrepreneurs, the workers and business owners who seek a broader prosperity for all people. Those are the women and men that America stands with; theirs is the vision we will support.

The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. But to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see in the images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated, or churches that are destroyed, or the Holocaust that is denied. (Applause.)

Let us condemn incitement against Sufi Muslims and Shiite pilgrims. It’s time to heed the words of Gandhi: "Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit." (Applause.) Together, we must work towards a world where we are strengthened by our differences, and not defined by them. That is what America embodies, that’s the vision we will support.

Among Israelis and Palestinians, the future must not belong to those who turn their backs on a prospect of peace. Let us leave behind those who thrive on conflict, those who reject the right of Israel to exist. The road is hard, but the destination is clear -- a secure, Jewish state of Israel and an independent, prosperous Palestine. (Applause.) Understanding that such a peace must come through a just agreement between the parties, America will walk alongside all who are prepared to make that journey.

In Syria, the future must not belong to a dictator who massacres his people. If there is a cause that cries out for protest in the world today, peaceful protest, it is a regime that tortures children and shoots rockets at apartment buildings. And we must remain engaged to assure that what began with citizens demanding their rights does not end in a cycle of sectarian violence.

Together, we must stand with those Syrians who believe in a different vision -- a Syria that is united and inclusive, where children don’t need to fear their own government, and all Syrians have a say in how they are governed -- Sunnis and Alawites, Kurds and Christians. That’s what America stands for. That is the outcome that we will work for -- with sanctions and consequences for those who persecute, and assistance and support for those who work for this common good. Because we believe that the Syrians who embrace this vision will have the strength and the legitimacy to lead.

In Iran, we see where the path of a violent and unaccountable ideology leads. The Iranian people have a remarkable and ancient history, and many Iranians wish to enjoy peace and prosperity alongside their neighbors. But just as it restricts the rights of its own people, the Iranian government continues to prop up a dictator in Damascus and supports terrorist groups abroad. Time and again, it has failed to take the opportunity to demonstrate that its nuclear program is peaceful, and to meet its obligations to the United Nations.

So let me be clear. America wants to resolve this issue through diplomacy, and we believe that there is still time and space to do so. But that time is not unlimited. We respect the right of nations to access peaceful nuclear power, but one of the purposes of the United Nations is to see that we harness that power for peace. And make no mistake, a nuclear-armed Iran is not a challenge that can be contained. It would threaten the elimination of Israel, the security of Gulf nations, and the stability of the global economy. It risks triggering a nuclear-arms race in the region, and the unraveling of the non-proliferation treaty. That’s why a coalition of countries is holding the Iranian government accountable. And that’s why the United States will do what we must to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

We know from painful experience that the path to security and prosperity does not lie outside the boundaries of international law and respect for human rights. That’s why this institution was established from the rubble of conflict. That is why liberty triumphed over tyranny in the Cold War. And that is the lesson of the last two decades as well.

History shows that peace and progress come to those who make the right choices. Nations in every part of the world have traveled this difficult path. Europe, the bloodiest battlefield of the 20th century, is united, free and at peace. From Brazil to South Africa, from Turkey to South Korea, from India to Indonesia, people of different races, religions, and traditions have lifted millions out of poverty, while respecting the rights of their citizens and meeting their responsibilities as nations.

And it is because of the progress that I’ve witnessed in my own lifetime, the progress that I’ve witnessed after nearly four years as President, that I remain ever hopeful about the world that we live in. The war in Iraq is over. American troops have come home. We’ve begun a transition in Afghanistan, and America and our allies will end our war on schedule in 2014. Al Qaeda has been weakened, and Osama bin Laden is no more. Nations have come together to lock down nuclear materials, and America and Russia are reducing our arsenals. We have seen hard choices made -- from Naypyidaw to Cairo to Abidjan -- to put more power in the hands of citizens.

At a time of economic challenge, the world has come together to broaden prosperity. Through the G20, we have partnered with emerging countries to keep the world on the path of recovery. America has pursued a development agenda that fuels growth and breaks dependency, and worked with African leaders to help them feed their nations. New partnerships have been forged to combat corruption and promote government that is open and transparent, and new commitments have been made through the Equal Futures Partnership to ensure that women and girls can fully participate in politics and pursue opportunity. And later today, I will discuss our efforts to combat the scourge of human trafficking.

All these things give me hope. But what gives me the most hope is not the actions of us, not the actions of leaders -- it is the people that I’ve seen. The American troops who have risked their lives and sacrificed their limbs for strangers half a world away; the students in Jakarta or Seoul who are eager to use their knowledge to benefit mankind; the faces in a square in Prague or a parliament in Ghana who see democracy giving voice to their aspirations; the young people in the favelas of Rio and the schools of Mumbai whose eyes shine with promise. These men, women, and children of every race and every faith remind me that for every angry mob that gets shown on television, there are billions around the world who share similar hopes and dreams. They tell us that there is a common heartbeat to humanity.

So much attention in our world turns to what divides us. That’s what we see on the news. That's what consumes our political debates. But when you strip it all away, people everywhere long for the freedom to determine their destiny; the dignity that comes with work; the comfort that comes with faith; and the justice that exists when governments serve their people -- and not the other way around.

The United States of America will always stand up for these aspirations, for our own people and for people all across the world. That was our founding purpose. That is what our history shows. That is what Chris Stevens worked for throughout his life.

And I promise you this: Long after the killers are brought to justice, Chris Stevens’s legacy will live on in the lives that he touched -- in the tens of thousands who marched against violence through the streets of Benghazi; in the Libyans who changed their Facebook photo to one of Chris; in the signs that read, simply, "Chris Stevens was a friend to all Libyans."

They should give us hope. They should remind us that so long as we work for it, justice will be done, that history is on our side, and that a rising tide of liberty will never be reversed.

Thank you very much. (Applause.)

END

10:16 A.M. EDT

Monday, September 24, 2012

Muslim Protests: Has Obama Helped Bring On an Anti-U.S. 'Islamist Spring'?

Monday, September 24, 2012 No comments

As the demonstrations over a American-made anti-Islam film continue, Michael Rubin and Aaron David Miller review the president's record in the Arab world.

In 2009, just five months into his presidency, Barack Obama gave a speech in Cairo to signal what he hoped would be a fresh start with the Muslim world. "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," Obama said. "Instead, they overlap and share common principles -- principles of justice, and progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings."

After almost a decade of U.S. military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan following the terrorist attacks of 9/11, Obama was seeking to turn the page on years of mutual distrust and suspicion.

That attempt largely failed, says Michael Rubin, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. But Rubin also says that's not because of anything Obama did or didn't do after he gave that speech. "I'm not sure we can really say that the Middle East revolves around the White House or [whoever] the occupant of the White House happens to be," Rubin says. "Oftentimes, whether it's under President Obama, or before him, under President Bush, or President Clinton, the U.S. tends to be in reactive mode towards the Middle East, rather than in proactive mode."

Protests sparked by an obscure U.S.-made video mocking Islam kicked off in Arab countries this month before sweeping across other parts of the Muslim world. And as the often violent protests continue, Obama's post-Arab spring policies are coming up for review in Washington in the midst of a heated election season.

Syria Salvation Conference: An Overview of the New Syria

Monday, September 24, 2012 No comments

-Syria is a sovereign State, its people are free and in full control of the State and all their territory. The sovereignty of the Syrian territories, State and people are one in the same. The Syrian people have a right to struggle by any means necessary to reclaim their occupied territories.

-The Syrian people are the source of sovereignty and legitimacy; this is enshrined through a civilian multi-party democratic republic, which is constituted by democratic institutions and where the rule of law prevails. Any monopoly of power is illegal, and power cannot be inherited under any circumstance.

-The Syrian State is to be built on the basis of complete equality of its citizens, in their rights as well as their duties. This includes the absolute equality of men and women, and the prohibition of any form of discrimination on the basis of race, family, gender, sect, political opinion, language, ethnicity or religion.

-The Syrian State must respect and protect the social diversity and privacy of all its citizens. It must acknowledge the cultural, civil and political rights of all the social groups that compose Syria. The Syrian State must consider every social group a genuine and crucial component of the Syrian nation.

-The Syrian State must protect all public freedoms, including the right to free information and freedom of the press; the right to create and join unions, civil organisations and political parties; freedom of conscience and worship in private and in public, individually and as a group; the right to peacefully protest and strike. The State must ensure that clear and effective laws are in place to protect these fundamental freedoms and rights of the people from the hegemony of the markets and political power.

-The State is to uphold all international human rights treaties, and all international agreements on social and economic rights. These rights are to be guaranteed to all citizens and residents.

-Syria is part of the Arab nation; it upholds and works on all forms of cooperation and unity with other Arab countries. The Syrian State is also to respect and uphold the social and cultural aspirations of all the nationalities that make up Syria.

-The Syrian people are to uphold their responsibility to support the Palestinian people and their right to a free and sovereign State, with Jerusalem as its capital. The Syrian people are also to support all peoples that resist oppression and struggle to achieve their liberation.

-The historical and cultural links between Syria and Islamic peoples are to be respected, a link based on the humanitarian message of religion.

-The Syrian state is to be based on the total separation of executive, legislative and judicial powers, and on the principle of rotation of power through free and secret elections.

-The Syrian army is the national institution that guarantees popular sovereignty and public freedoms. It is the pillar of the state and guarantor of national unity. The army is to defend national security, the constitution and its principles. The army is never to intervene in political life.

-A new constitution is to establish the basis of the democratic plural system and the method of election. It is also to insure the representation of all Syrians, all segments of Syrian society, and all provinces in the legislative powers. The constitution must protect the equal rights of all ideological currents and political parties, without the hegemony of one over all others. It is to insure the stability of the parliamentary system and the circulation of power by parliamentary majority through general election. The constitution is to regulate in detail the income of political parties and their spending.

-The President of the republic is to uphold the constitution and national security, as well as the concept of the separation of powers. The President is to be elected by a direct general election. The presidential position cannot be held for more than two terms and each presidential term is to last four years only.

-The Prime Minister is to represent the parliamentary majority. He or she is responsible for the executive power of the State and is accountable to the people, who are represented by parliament. Each minister has full ability to manage the matters of their ministry according to the ministerial statement that is entrusted to the ministerial cabinet by parliament.

-The State is to ensure that public money and property are used only to the benefit of the citizens, under a policy of social justice, sustainable and equal development, and the redistribution of wealth and resources through a taxation system that takes into account class and province. The State is to also ensure economic freedoms, and to regulate them in a way that prevents monopolies and speculation. The State must also protect the rights of workers and consumers.

-The Syrian State must uphold its responsibility to eradicate all forms of poverty in the country, fight unemployment, and work on providing fair and meaningful employment in dignified conditions for all capable citizens. The state must provide basic services to all citizens.

Preparatory Committee

National Conference for Syria Salvation

22/9/2012

Syria Salvation Conference: Our Main Principles

Monday, September 24, 2012 No comments

The parties, political organisations, and personalities participating in the National Conference for Syria Salvation agree on the following principles as a basis and general foundation for their political position and movement:

1. Toppling the regime with all its figures and facets, which ensures the ability to build a civil democratic State, a state of law, justice and equal citizenship regardless of race, sex and religion.

2. Rejection of sectarianism and everything else that contributes to dividing Syrian society on a pre-civic basis.

3. Adopting non-violent resistance as the strategy to accomplish the goals of the revolution. We recognise that militarizing the revolution (arming civilians) is a danger to both the revolution and society. In this context we view the “Free Syrian Army” as an objective phenomenon that emerged from the refusal of Syrian soldiers to kill their fellow countrymen who protested peacefully, and from this perspective we consider the “Free Syrian Army” one of the components of the revolution. As such, it has a duty to support, strengthen and defend the peaceful strategy of the revolution.

4. Affirming the importance of bringing back the Syrian Army to its true national role, which it was created for, and to extract it from the clutches of the regime, who have forced this national institution to play a contradictory role in placing it against its countrymen. The conference members agree on the importance of the Syrian Army to be under a political leadership that represents the Syrian people. The primary objective of the Army should be to restore the Syrian occupied territories, and to respond to any dangers that jeopardise the security of Syria. The Army must also protect national security, considering Zionism as the main threat to Syria and the peoples of the region.

5. To ensure the accomplishment of the revolution’s goals by using the power of the Syrian people, and to hold the regime primarily responsible for creating the atmosphere that is used for foreign intervention.

6. To work on protecting civilians based on international law. Protecting civilians is a primary demand in the midst of all the killing and massacres that have been committed against innocent civilians.

7. Kurdish ethnicity is a primary and historical constituent part of the Syrian people. This has to be guaranteed in clear constitutional principles. The Kurdish national case must, and can only, be solved in a democratic and just manner through a free and united Syria – united in its people and territory.

8. Syria is an undivided part of the Arab Nation. Syria is an unbreakable social unit in itself; none of its components are allowed to be taken from it.

Preparatory Committee

National Conference for Syria Salvation

22/9/2012