A right-minded but (mostly) forgettable speech

It is hard for me to knock a speech whose most frequently occurring words are “region” “must,” “change,” “people,” and “rights.”  There has to be something to appreciate there.  The President was particularly good on Tunisia and Egypt, supporting completion of their transitions to democracy and offering economic help, mainly through debt forgiveness, trade and investment.  He was better on Bahrain than I might have expected, underlining that the destruction of Shia mosques there is unacceptable (thank you Roy Gutman for your reporting on that!).

On Syria, he was so-so, appealing once again for Bashar al Assad to lead reform (fat chance) or step aside (fat chance of that too).  But that is farther than Obama has gone in the past.  He gave President Saleh of Yemen a push toward the exit, but it did not seem to have any real force behind it.

The President was overoptimistic on both Afghanistan and Iraq, claiming we have broken the momentum of the insurgency in the former and established multiethnic and nonsectarian government in the latter.  Both may happen, but they aren’t consolidated achievements yet.

On Israel/Palestine, the President took something like Shimon Peres’ approach: focus for now on defining Palestine’s territory and ensuring Israel’s security, solve Jerusalem and refugee return later.  Rhetorical support for Israel was strong, as was opposition to the Palestinian effort to get the UN General Assembly to approve statehood.  But there was really nothing new.  That might be the best he can do for the moment, which is not propitious.

No mention of Saudi Arabia.  A bit of talk about Iranian hypocrisy in providing assistance to Syria in repressing demonstrators, but no clarion call for rebellion there.  Strong on women’s rights, inter-religious dialogue and rejection of political violence.  Big throughout on self-determination (Palestinians take note), values as a focus for American policy in addition to interests, universal rights and strengthening the economic underpinnings of political transition.

A right-minded but I am afraid forgettable speech.

PS:  I did not anticipate when I wrote this piece quickly this afternoon the furor that has erupted over the President’s endorsement of the ’67 borders of Israel as the basis for negotiations and eventual land swaps.  It is still a bit hard for me to see what other basis there would be in a “land for peace” deal, but I take the point that this is the first time an American president has endorsed an idea that many of us take for granted.  Those who object need to explain what other basis there might be for the territorial solution, other than “making the land whole.”