The “Hand of Friendship”

President Obama symbolically gave the first television interview (telecast on January 27^th) of his new administration to the Dubai-based Al Arabiya satellite news channel – a message aimed at the Islamic world, particularly the Middle East. According to an AOL poll, more Americans than not were bothered by this interview, and statements from the President that he was raised in the largest Muslim nation on earth, Indonesia, and had Muslim relatives, did little to assuage many in U.S. who are still wondering where this President’s sympathies truly lie. Many Jewish Americans, uncomfortable enough with his desire to effect a more balanced approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, were particularly disturbed as to the President choice of a “first interview.”

True to his campaign rhetoric, Obama begins his public communication with the outside world with the philosophy that we should engage in dialogue with those who might oppose us or who in fact do oppose us. By declaring that “Americans are not your enemy” and asking for a mutual engagement of the Islamic world “based on mutual respect and mutual interest,” Obama began a process to defuse a political and military quagmire that still threatens to embroil the United States in further unaffordable conflicts in a region ripped apart with passionate fundamentalists who view America as the embodiment of everything they despise. In short, he is attempting to give the vast moderate Muslim majority a reason not to follow the radical, anti-American path that seems to have enticed them in recent years.

His support for Israel was clear: “Israel is a strong ally of the United States. They will not stop being a strong ally of the United States. And I will continue to believe that Israel's security is paramount. But I also believe that there are Israelis who recognize that it is important to achieve peace. They will be willing to make sacrifices if the time is appropriate and if there is serious partnership on the other side.” And as he outlined the clear threats that Iran’s saber-rattling and nuclear ambitions posed for the region, if not the world, Obama also indicated a willingness to open a dialogue with this terrorist nation.

He assessed the potential for resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian problem, amplified by the recent conflict in Gaza: “It's going to be difficult; it's going to take time.... What we want to do is to listen, set aside some of the preconceptions.... And I think if we do that, then there's a possibility at least of achieving some breakthroughs. I think it is possible for us to see a Palestinian state - I'm not going to put a time frame on it - that is contiguous, that allows freedom of movement for its people, that allows for trade with other countries, that allows the creation of businesses and commerce so that people have a better life.”

As al Qaeda strongman, Ayman al-Zawahiri recently decried Obama derisively as the Black servant of the White American leadership, calling for Muslim unity against the American devil, Obama, in his interview, responded that this terrorist group’s rhetoric seemed “nervous,” defensive and “bankrupt” for a new world order. Indeed, changing the face of America – the perception of a global bully into a global citizen (yet still in support of her allies, while more patient with those who disagree with her policies) – requires a face so different than what has been seen as traditional leadership that our traditional enemies are literally unable to muster a coherent attack against their old American nemesis.

If Obama is able, with the force of his persona and his words, to change the perception of America as a threat so as to make the recruitment of anti-American terrorists that much more difficult, how many billions of dollars and thousands of American lives will that save? What’s the cost if his efforts fail? That we are no worse off than we are now? And if he succeeds, even in part? In this economy, I still know a bargain when I see it.

I’m Peter Dekom, and I approve of this approach.