Editorial Note: The
following news reports are summaries from original sources. They may
also include corrections of Arabic names and political terminology.
Comments are in parentheses.
Text and Video of Obama's Speech on the Middle
East
May 19, 2011
May 19, 2011 REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT ON THE MIDDLE EAST AND
NORTH AFRICA State Department Washington, D.C. 12:15 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT:
Thank you. Thank you. (Applause.) Thank you very much. Thank you.
Please, have a seat. Thank you very much. I want to begin by thanking
Hillary Clinton, who has traveled so much these last six months that she
is approaching a new landmark — one million frequent flyer miles.
(Laughter.) I count on Hillary every single day, and I believe that she
will go down as one of the finest Secretaries of State in our nation’s
history.
The State Department is a fitting venue to mark a new chapter in
American diplomacy. For six months, we have witnessed an extraordinary
change taking place in the Middle East and North Africa. Square by
square, town by town, country by country, the people have risen up to
demand their basic human rights. Two leaders have stepped aside. More
may follow. And though these countries may be a great distance from our
shores, we know that our own future is bound to this region by the
forces of economics and security, by history and by faith.
Today, I want to talk about this change — the forces that are
driving it and how we can respond in a way that advances our values and
strengthens our security.
Now, already, we’ve done much to shift our foreign policy
following a decade defined by two costly conflicts. After years of war
in Iraq, we’ve removed 100,000 American troops and ended our combat
mission there. In Afghanistan, we’ve broken the Taliban’s momentum, and
this July we will begin to bring our troops home and continue a
transition to Afghan lead. And after years of war against al Qaeda and
its affiliates, we have dealt al Qaeda a huge blow by killing its
leader, Osama bin Laden.
Bin Laden was no martyr. He was a mass murderer who offered a
message of hate –- an insistence that Muslims had to take up arms
against the West, and that violence against men, women and children was
the only path to change. He rejected democracy and individual rights for
Muslims in favor of violent extremism; his agenda focused on what he
could destroy -– not what he could build.
Bin Laden and his murderous vision won some adherents. But even
before his death, al Qaeda was losing its struggle for relevance, as the
overwhelming majority of people saw that the slaughter of innocents did
not answer their cries for a better life. By the time we found bin
Laden, al Qaeda’s agenda had come to be seen by the vast majority of the
region as a dead end, and the people of the Middle East and North Africa
had taken their future into their own hands.
That story of self-determination began six months ago in Tunisia.
On December 17th, a young vendor named Mohammed Bouazizi was devastated
when a police officer confiscated his cart. This was not unique. It’s
the same kind of humiliation that takes place every day in many parts of
the world -– the relentless tyranny of governments that deny their
citizens dignity. Only this time, something different happened. After
local officials refused to hear his complaints, this young man, who had
never been particularly active in politics, went to the headquarters of
the provincial government, doused himself in fuel, and lit himself on
fire.
There are times in the course of history when the actions of
ordinary citizens spark movements for change because they speak to a
longing for freedom that has been building up for years. In America,
think of the defiance of those patriots in Boston who refused to pay
taxes to a King, or the dignity of Rosa Parks as she sat courageously in
her seat. So it was in Tunisia, as that vendor’s act of desperation
tapped into the frustration felt throughout the country. Hundreds of
protesters took to the streets, then thousands. And in the face of
batons and sometimes bullets, they refused to go home –- day after day,
week after week — until a dictator of more than two decades finally left
power.
The story of this revolution, and the ones that followed, should
not have come as a surprise. The nations of the Middle East and North
Africa won their independence long ago, but in too many places their
people did not. In too many countries, power has been concentrated in
the hands of a few. In too many countries, a citizen like that young
vendor had nowhere to turn -– no honest judiciary to hear his case; no
independent media to give him voice; no credible political party to
represent his views; no free and fair election where he could choose his
leader.
And this lack of self-determination –- the chance to make your
life what you will –- has applied to the region’s economy as well. Yes,
some nations are blessed with wealth in oil and gas, and that has led to
pockets of prosperity. But in a global economy based on knowledge, based
on innovation, no development strategy can be based solely upon what
comes out of the ground. Nor can people reach their potential when you
cannot start a business without paying a bribe.
In the face of these challenges, too many leaders in the region
tried to direct their people’s grievances elsewhere. The West was blamed
as the source of all ills, a half-century after the end of colonialism.
Antagonism toward Israel became the only acceptable outlet for political
expression. Divisions of tribe, ethnicity and religious sect were
manipulated as a means of holding on to power, or taking it away from
somebody else.
But the events of the past six months show us that strategies of
repression and strategies of diversion will not work anymore. Satellite
television and the Internet provide a window into the wider world -– a
world of astonishing progress in places like India and Indonesia and
Brazil. Cell phones and social networks allow young people to connect
and organize like never before. And so a new generation has emerged. And
their voices tell us that change cannot be denied. In Cairo, we heard
the voice of the young mother who said, “It’s like I can finally breathe
fresh air for the first time.” In Sanaa, we heard the students who
chanted, “The night must come to an end.”
In Benghazi, we heard the engineer who said, “Our words are free
now. It’s a feeling you can’t explain.” In Damascus, we heard the
young man who said, “After the first yelling, the first shout, you feel
dignity.”
Those shouts of human dignity are being heard across the region.
And through the moral force of nonviolence, the people of the region
have achieved more change in six months than terrorists have
accomplished in decades.
Of course, change of this magnitude does not come easily. In our
day and age -– a time of 24-hour news cycles and constant communication
–- people expect the transformation of the region to be resolved in a
matter of weeks. But it will be years before this story reaches its end.
Along the way, there will be good days and there will bad days. In some
places, change will be swift; in others, gradual. And as we’ve already
seen, calls for change may give way, in some cases, to fierce contests
for power.
The question before us is what role America will play as this
story unfolds. For decades, the United States has pursued a set of core
interests in the region: countering terrorism and stopping the spread of
nuclear weapons; securing the free flow of commerce and safe-guarding
the security of the region; standing up for Israel’s security and
pursuing Arab-Israeli peace.
We will continue to do these things, with the firm belief that
America’s interests are not hostile to people’s hopes; they’re essential
to them. We believe that no one benefits from a nuclear arms race in the
region, or al Qaeda’s brutal attacks. We believe people everywhere would
see their economies crippled by a cut-off in energy supplies. As we did
in the Gulf War, we will not tolerate aggression across borders, and we
will keep our commitments to friends and partners.
Yet we must acknowledge that a strategy based solely upon the
narrow pursuit of these interests will not fill an empty stomach or
allow someone to speak their mind. Moreover, failure to speak to the
broader aspirations of ordinary people will only feed the suspicion that
has festered for years that the United States pursues our interests at
their expense. Given that this mistrust runs both ways –- as Americans
have been seared by hostage-taking and violent rhetoric and terrorist
attacks that have killed thousands of our citizens -– a failure to
change our approach threatens a deepening spiral of division between the
United States and the Arab world.
And that’s why, two years ago in Cairo, I began to broaden our
engagement based upon mutual interests and mutual respect. I believed
then -– and I believe now -– that we have a stake not just in the
stability of nations, but in the self-determination of individuals. The
status quo is not sustainable. Societies held together by fear and
repression may offer the illusion of stability for a time, but they are
built upon fault lines that will eventually tear asunder.
So we face a historic opportunity. We have the chance to show
that America values the dignity of the street vendor in Tunisia more
than the raw power of the dictator. There must be no doubt that the
United States of America welcomes change that advances
self-determination and opportunity. Yes, there will be perils that
accompany this moment of promise. But after decades of accepting the
world as it is in the region, we have a chance to pursue the world as it
should be.
Of course, as we do, we must proceed with a sense of humility.
It’s not America that put people into the streets of Tunis or Cairo -–
it was the people themselves who launched these movements, and it’s the
people themselves that must ultimately determine their outcome.
Not every country will follow our particular form of
representative democracy, and there will be times when our short-term
interests don’t align perfectly with our long-term vision for the
region. But we can, and we will, speak out for a set of core principles
–- principles that have guided our response to the events over the past
six months:
The United States opposes the use of violence and repression
against the people of the region. (Applause.) The United States
supports a set of universal rights. And these rights include free
speech, the freedom of peaceful assembly, the freedom of religion,
equality for men and women under the rule of law, and the right to
choose your own leaders -– whether you live in Baghdad or Damascus,
Sanaa or Tehran.
And we support political and economic reform in the Middle East
and North Africa that can meet the legitimate aspirations of ordinary
people throughout the region.
Our support for these principles is not a secondary interest.
Today I want to make it clear that it is a top priority that must be
translated into concrete actions, and supported by all of the
diplomatic, economic and strategic tools at our disposal. Let me be
specific. First, it will be the policy of the United States to promote
reform across the region, and to support transitions to democracy. That
effort begins in Egypt and Tunisia, where the stakes are high -– as
Tunisia was at the vanguard of this democratic wave, and Egypt is both a
longstanding partner and the Arab world’s largest nation. Both nations
can set a strong example through free and fair elections, a vibrant
civil society, accountable and effective democratic institutions, and
responsible regional leadership. But our support must also extend to
nations where transitions have yet to take place.
Unfortunately, in too many countries, calls for change have thus
far been answered by violence. The most extreme example is Libya, where
Muammar Qaddafi launched a war against his own people, promising to hunt
them down like rats. As I said when the United States joined an
international coalition to intervene, we cannot prevent every injustice
perpetrated by a regime against its people, and we have learned from our
experience in Iraq just how costly and difficult it is to try to impose
regime change by force -– no matter how well-intentioned it may be.
But in Libya, we saw the prospect of imminent massacre, we had a
mandate for action, and heard the Libyan people’s call for help. Had we
not acted along with our NATO allies and regional coalition partners,
thousands would have been killed. The message would have been clear:
Keep power by killing as many people as it takes. Now, time is working
against Qaddafi. He does not have control over his country. The
opposition has organized a legitimate and credible Interim Council. And
when Qaddafi inevitably leaves or is forced from power, decades of
provocation will come to an end, and the transition to a democratic
Libya can proceed.
While Libya has faced violence on the greatest scale, it’s not
the only place where leaders have turned to repression to remain in
power. Most recently, the Syrian regime has chosen the path of murder
and the mass arrests of its citizens. The United States has condemned
these actions, and working with the international community we have
stepped up our sanctions on the Syrian regime –- including sanctions
announced yesterday on President Assad and those around him. The
Syrian people have shown their courage in demanding a transition to
democracy. President Assad now has a choice: He can lead that
transition, or get out of the way. The Syrian government must stop
shooting demonstrators and allow peaceful protests. It must release
political prisoners and stop unjust arrests. It must allow human rights
monitors to have access to cities like Dara’a; and start a serious
dialogue to advance a democratic transition. Otherwise, President Assad
and his regime will continue to be challenged from within and will
continue to be isolated abroad.
So far, Syria has followed its Iranian ally, seeking assistance
from Tehran in the tactics of suppression. And this speaks to the
hypocrisy of the Iranian regime, which says it stand for the rights of
protesters abroad, yet represses its own people at home. Let’s remember
that the first peaceful protests in the region were in the streets of
Tehran, where the government brutalized women and men, and threw
innocent people into jail. We still hear the chants echo from the
rooftops of Tehran. The image of a young woman dying in the streets is
still seared in our memory. And we will continue to insist that the
Iranian people deserve their universal rights, and a government that
does not smother their aspirations.
Now, our opposition to Iran’s intolerance and Iran’s repressive
measures, as well as its illicit nuclear program and its support of
terror, is well known. But if America is to be credible, we must
acknowledge that at times our friends in the region have not all reacted
to the demands for consistent change — with change that’s consistent
with the principles that I’ve outlined today. That’s true in Yemen,
where President Saleh needs to follow through on his commitment to
transfer power. And that’s true today in Bahrain.
Bahrain is a longstanding partner, and we are committed to its
security. We recognize that Iran has tried to take advantage of the
turmoil there, and that the Bahraini government has a legitimate
interest in the rule of law. Nevertheless, we have insisted both
publicly and privately that mass arrests and brute force are at odds
with the universal rights of Bahrain’s citizens, and we will — and such
steps will not make legitimate calls for reform go away. The only way
forward is for the government and opposition to engage in a dialogue,
and you can’t have a real dialogue when parts of the peaceful opposition
are in jail. (Applause.) The government must create the conditions for
dialogue, and the opposition must participate to forge a just future for
all Bahrainis.
Indeed, one of the broader lessons to be drawn from this period
is that sectarian divides need not lead to conflict. In Iraq, we see the
promise of a multiethnic, multisectarian democracy. The Iraqi people
have rejected the perils of political violence in favor of a democratic
process, even as they’ve taken full responsibility for their own
security. Of course, like all new democracies, they will face setbacks.
But Iraq is poised to play a key role in the region if it continues its
peaceful progress. And as they do, we will be proud to stand with them
as a steadfast partner.
So in the months ahead, America must use all our influence to
encourage reform in the region. Even as we acknowledge that each country
is different, we need to speak honestly about the principles that we
believe in, with friend and foe alike. Our message is simple: If you
take the risks that reform entails, you will have the full support of
the United States. We must also build on our efforts to broaden our
engagement beyond elites, so that we reach the people who will shape the
future -– particularly young people. We will continue to make good on
the commitments that I made in Cairo -– to build networks of
entrepreneurs and expand exchanges in education, to foster cooperation
in science and technology, and combat disease. Across the region, we
intend to provide assistance to civil society, including those that may
not be officially sanctioned, and who speak uncomfortable truths. And we
will use the technology to connect with -– and listen to –- the voices
of the people.
For the fact is, real reform does not come at the ballot box
alone. Through our efforts we must support those basic rights to speak
your mind and access information. We will support open access to the
Internet, and the right of journalists to be heard -– whether it’s a big
news organization or a lone blogger. In the 21st century, information is
power, the truth cannot be hidden, and the legitimacy of governments
will ultimately depend on active and informed citizens. Such open
discourse is important even if what is said does not square with our
worldview. Let me be clear, America respects the right of all peaceful
and law-abiding voices to be heard, even if we disagree with them. And
sometimes we profoundly disagree with them.
We look forward to working with all who embrace genuine and
inclusive democracy. What we will oppose is an attempt by any group to
restrict the rights of others, and to hold power through coercion and
not consent. Because democracy depends not only on elections, but also
strong and accountable institutions, and the respect for the rights of
minorities. Such tolerance is particularly important when it comes to
religion. In Tahrir Square, we heard Egyptians from all walks of life
chant, “Muslims, Christians, we are one.” America will work to see that
this spirit prevails -– that all faiths are respected, and that bridges
are built among them. In a region that was the birthplace of three world
religions, intolerance can lead only to suffering and stagnation. And
for this season of change to succeed, Coptic Christians must have the
right to worship freely in Cairo, just as Shia must never have their
mosques destroyed in Bahrain.
What is true for religious minorities is also true when it comes
to the rights of women. History shows that countries are more prosperous
and more peaceful when women are empowered. And that’s why we will
continue to insist that universal rights apply to women as well as men
-– by focusing assistance on child and maternal health; by helping women
to teach, or start a business; by standing up for the right of women to
have their voices heard, and to run for office. The region will never
reach its full potential when more than half of its population is
prevented from achieving their full potential. (Applause.)
Now, even as we promote political reform, even as we promote
human rights in the region, our efforts can’t stop there. So the second
way that we must support positive change in the region is through our
efforts to advance economic development for nations that are
transitioning to democracy.
After all, politics alone has not put protesters into the
streets. The tipping point for so many people is the more constant
concern of putting food on the table and providing for a family. Too
many people in the region wake up with few expectations other than
making it through the day, perhaps hoping that their luck will change.
Throughout the region, many young people have a solid education, but
closed economies leave them unable to find a job. Entrepreneurs are
brimming with ideas, but corruption leaves them unable to profit from
those ideas.
The greatest untapped resource in the Middle East and North
Africa is the talent of its people. In the recent protests, we see that
talent on display, as people harness technology to move the world. It’s
no coincidence that one of the leaders of Tahrir Square was an executive
for Google. That energy now needs to be channeled, in country after
country, so that economic growth can solidify the accomplishments of the
street. For just as democratic revolutions can be triggered by a lack of
individual opportunity, successful democratic transitions depend upon an
expansion of growth and broad-based prosperity.
So, drawing from what we’ve learned around the world, we think
it’s important to focus on trade, not just aid; on investment, not just
assistance. The goal must be a model in which protectionism gives way to
openness, the reigns of commerce pass from the few to the many, and the
economy generates jobs for the young. America’s support for democracy
will therefore be based on ensuring financial stability, promoting
reform, and integrating competitive markets with each other and the
global economy. And we’re going to start with Tunisia and Egypt.
First, we’ve asked the World Bank and the International Monetary
Fund to present a plan at next week’s G8 summit for what needs to be
done to stabilize and modernize the economies of Tunisia and Egypt.
Together, we must help them recover from the disruptions of their
democratic upheaval, and support the governments that will be elected
later this year. And we are urging other countries to help Egypt and
Tunisia meet its near-term financial needs.
Second, we do not want a democratic Egypt to be saddled by the
debts of its past. So we will relieve a democratic Egypt of up to $1
billion in debt, and work with our Egyptian partners to invest these
resources to foster growth and entrepreneurship. We will help Egypt
regain access to markets by guaranteeing $1 billion in borrowing that is
needed to finance infrastructure and job creation. And we will help
newly democratic governments recover assets that were stolen. Third,
we’re working with Congress to create Enterprise Funds to invest in
Tunisia and Egypt. And these will be modeled on funds that supported the
transitions in Eastern Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall. OPIC
will soon launch a $2 billion facility to support private investment
across the region. And we will work with the allies to refocus the
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development so that it provides the
same support for democratic transitions and economic modernization in
the Middle East and North Africa as it has in Europe.
Fourth, the United States will launch a comprehensive Trade and
Investment Partnership Initiative in the Middle East and North Africa.
If you take out oil exports, this entire region of over 400 million
people exports roughly the same amount as Switzerland. So we will work
with the EU to facilitate more trade within the region, build on
existing agreements to promote integration with U.S. and European
markets, and open the door for those countries who adopt high standards
of reform and trade liberalization to construct a regional trade
arrangement. And just as EU membership served as an incentive for reform
in Europe, so should the vision of a modern and prosperous economy
create a powerful force for reform in the Middle East and North Africa.
Prosperity also requires tearing down walls that stand in the way
of progress -– the corruption of elites who steal from their people; the
red tape that stops an idea from becoming a business; the patronage that
distributes wealth based on tribe or sect. We will help governments meet
international obligations, and invest efforts at anti-corruption — by
working with parliamentarians who are developing reforms, and activists
who use technology to increase transparency and hold government
accountable. Politics and human rights; economic reform. Let me
conclude by talking about another cornerstone of our approach to the
region, and that relates to the pursuit of peace.
For decades, the conflict between Israelis and Arabs has cast a
shadow over the region. For Israelis, it has meant living with the fear
that their children could be blown up on a bus or by rockets fired at
their homes, as well as the pain of knowing that other children in the
region are taught to hate them. For Palestinians, it has meant suffering
the humiliation of occupation, and never living in a nation of their
own. Moreover, this conflict has come with a larger cost to the Middle
East, as it impedes partnerships that could bring greater security and
prosperity and empowerment to ordinary people. For over two years, my
administration has worked with the parties and the international
community to end this conflict, building on decades of work by previous
administrations. Yet expectations have gone unmet. Israeli settlement
activity continues. Palestinians have walked away from talks. The world
looks at a conflict that has grinded on and on and on, and sees nothing
but stalemate. Indeed, there are those who argue that with all the
change and uncertainty in the region, it is simply not possible to move
forward now.
I disagree. At a time when the people of the Middle East and
North Africa are casting off the burdens of the past, the drive for a
lasting peace that ends the conflict and resolves all claims is more
urgent than ever. That’s certainly true for the two parties involved.
For the Palestinians, efforts to delegitimize Israel will end in
failure. Symbolic actions to isolate Israel at the United Nations in
September won’t create an independent state. Palestinian leaders will
not achieve peace or prosperity if Hamas insists on a path of terror and
rejection. And Palestinians will never realize their independence by
denying the right of Israel to exist.
As for Israel, our friendship is rooted deeply in a shared
history and shared values. Our commitment to Israel’s security is
unshakeable. And we will stand against attempts to single it out for
criticism in international forums. But precisely because of our
friendship, it’s important that we tell the truth: The status quo is
unsustainable, and Israel too must act boldly to advance a lasting
peace.
The fact is, a growing number of Palestinians live west of the
Jordan River. Technology will make it harder for Israel to defend
itself. A region undergoing profound change will lead to populism in
which millions of people -– not just one or two leaders — must believe
peace is possible. The international community is tired of an endless
process that never produces an outcome. The dream of a Jewish and
democratic state cannot be fulfilled with permanent occupation.
Now, ultimately, it is up to the Israelis and Palestinians to
take action. No peace can be imposed upon them — not by the United
States; not by anybody else. But endless delay won’t make the problem go
away. What America and the international community can do is to state
frankly what everyone knows — a lasting peace will involve two states
for two peoples: Israel as a Jewish state and the homeland for the
Jewish people, and the state of Palestine as the homeland for the
Palestinian people, each state enjoying self-determination, mutual
recognition, and peace.
So while the core issues of the conflict must be negotiated, the
basis of those negotiations is clear: a viable Palestine, a secure
Israel. The United States believes that negotiations should result in
two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and
Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. We believe the
borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with
mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are
established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right
to govern themselves, and reach their full potential, in a sovereign and
contiguous state.
As for security, every state has the right to self-defense, and
Israel must be able to defend itself -– by itself -– against any threat.
Provisions must also be robust enough to prevent a resurgence of
terrorism, to stop the infiltration of weapons, and to provide effective
border security. The full and phased withdrawal of Israeli military
forces should be coordinated with the assumption of Palestinian security
responsibility in a sovereign, non-militarized state. And the duration
of this transition period must be agreed, and the effectiveness of
security arrangements must be demonstrated.
These principles provide a foundation for negotiations.
Palestinians should know the territorial outlines of their state;
Israelis should know that their basic security concerns will be met. I’m
aware that these steps alone will not resolve the conflict, because two
wrenching and emotional issues will remain: the future of Jerusalem, and
the fate of Palestinian refugees. But moving forward now on the basis of
territory and security provides a foundation to resolve those two issues
in a way that is just and fair, and that respects the rights and
aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians.
Now, let me say this: Recognizing that negotiations need to begin
with the issues of territory and security does not mean that it will be
easy to come back to the table. In particular, the recent announcement
of an agreement between Fatah and Hamas raises profound and legitimate
questions for Israel: How can one negotiate with a party that has shown
itself unwilling to recognize your right to exist? And in the weeks and
months to come, Palestinian leaders will have to provide a credible
answer to that question. Meanwhile, the United States, our Quartet
partners, and the Arab states will need to continue every effort to get
beyond the current impasse.
I recognize how hard this will be. Suspicion and hostility has
been passed on for generations, and at times it has hardened. But I’m
convinced that the majority of Israelis and Palestinians would rather
look to the future than be trapped in the past. We see that spirit in
the Israeli father whose son was killed by Hamas, who helped start an
organization that brought together Israelis and Palestinians who had
lost loved ones. That father said, “I gradually realized that the only
hope for progress was to recognize the face of the conflict.” We see it
in the actions of a Palestinian who lost three daughters to Israeli
shells in Gaza. “I have the right to feel angry,” he said. “So many
people were expecting me to hate. My answer to them is I shall not hate.
Let us hope,” he said, “for tomorrow.”
That is the choice that must be made -– not simply in the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but across the entire region -– a choice
between hate and hope; between the shackles of the past and the promise
of the future. It’s a choice that must be made by leaders and by the
people, and it’s a choice that will define the future of a region that
served as the cradle of civilization and a crucible of strife.
For all the challenges that lie ahead, we see many reasons to be
hopeful. In Egypt, we see it in the efforts of young people who led
protests. In Syria, we see it in the courage of those who brave bullets
while chanting, “peaceful, peaceful.” In Benghazi, a city threatened
with destruction, we see it in the courthouse square where people gather
to celebrate the freedoms that they had never known. Across the region,
those rights that we take for granted are being claimed with joy by
those who are prying lose the grip of an iron fist.
For the American people, the scenes of upheaval in the region may
be unsettling, but the forces driving it are not unfamiliar. Our own
nation was founded through a rebellion against an empire. Our people
fought a painful Civil War that extended freedom and dignity to those
who were enslaved. And I would not be standing here today unless past
generations turned to the moral force of nonviolence as a way to perfect
our union –- organizing, marching, protesting peacefully together to
make real those words that declared our nation: “We hold these truths to
be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”
Those words must guide our response to the change that is
transforming the Middle East and North Africa -– words which tell us
that repression will fail, and that tyrants will fall, and that every
man and woman is endowed with certain inalienable rights.
It will not be easy. There’s no straight line to progress, and
hardship always accompanies a season of hope. But the United States of
America was founded on the belief that people should govern themselves.
And now we cannot hesitate to stand squarely on the side of those who
are reaching for their rights, knowing that their success will bring
about a world that is more peaceful, more stable, and more just.
Thank you very much, everybody. (Applause.) Thank you.
This site contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this
constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for
in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.
Section 107, the material on this site is
distributed without profit to those
who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information
for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
Opinions
expressed in various sections are the sole responsibility of their authors
and they may not represent Al-Jazeerah & ccun.org.