Obama’s Cairo speech was a calculated image-repair maneuver, not philosophy

Evidence

Barack Obama was the ideal vehicle to model this new posture. Indeed, in his inaugural address, Obama did precisely as the policy group’s document suggested. In one of his first speeches abroad, in Cairo, Obama rejected the “clash of civilizations” argument, emphasizing the shared common history and aspirations of the East and West. Whereas the “clash” discourse sees the West and the world of Islam as mutually exclusive and as polar opposites, Obama emphasized “common principles.” He spoke of “civilization’s debt to Islam,” which “pav[ed] the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment,” and he acknowledged Muslims’ contributions to the development of science, medicine, navigation, architecture, calligraphy, and music. This was no doubt a remarkable admission for an American president, but one that Obama clearly saw as vital to bolstering the United States’ badly damaged image in the “Muslim world.” Indeed, this speech marked a significant rhetorical shift from the Bush era. — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 497

Categorization

  • XREF: Connects to the earlier chapter frame about benevolent supremacy and the US shaping other nations’ destinies — this passage shows the softer rhetorical mode of the same imperial posture. — connects to: Obama’s Cairo speech repackaged rather than abandoned the imperial frame; Obama’s presidency mutated and advanced rather than ended the war on terror — Khaled A. Beydoun, American Islamophobia_ Understanding…, 329
  • SEED: Angle: how rhetorical inclusion (‘civilization’s debt to Islam’) can be a more effective instrument of empire than open hostility — sincerity versus instrumentality in foreign policy speech.

Broader Connections