Obama’s Speech in Cairo (Full Text)

I am honored to be in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable institutions. For over a thousand years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning, and for over a century, Cairo University has been a source of Egypt's advancement. Together, you represent the harmony between tradition and progress. I am grateful for your hospitality, and the hospitality of the people of Egypt. I am also proud to carry with me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: “Assalaamu alaykum!”.

We meet at a time of tension between the United States and Muslims around the world - tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond any current policy debate. The relationship between Islam and the West includes centuries of co-existence and cooperation, but also conflict and religious wars. More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations. Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam.

Story continues below

Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims. The attacks of September 11th, 2001 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights. This has bred more fear and mistrust.

So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end.

I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles - principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.

I do so recognizing that change cannot happen overnight. No single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have all the complex questions that brought us to this point. But I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us, "Be conscious of God and speak always the truth." That is what I will try to do - to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart.

Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith.

As a student of history, I also know civilization' s debt to Islam. It was Islam - at places like Al-Azhar University - that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.

I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America's story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President John Adams wrote, "The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims". And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our Universities, excelled in our sports arenas, won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim-American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers - Thomas Jefferson - kept in his personal library.

So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn't. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.

But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words - within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: E pluribus unum: "Out of many, one."

Much has been made of the fact that an African-American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected President. But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores - that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average.

Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one's religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state of our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That is why the U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it.

So let there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America. And I believe that America holds within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share common aspirations - to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. These things we share. This is the hope of all humanity.

Of course, recognizing our common humanity is only the beginning of our task. Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people. These needs will be met only if we act boldly in the years ahead; and if we understand that the challenges we face are shared, and our failure to meet them will hurt us all.

For we have learned from recent experience that when a financial system weakens in one country, prosperity is hurt everywhere. When a new flu infects one human being, all are at risk. When one nation pursues a nuclear weapon, the risk of nuclear attack rises for all nations. When violent extremists operate in one stretch of mountains, people are endangered across an ocean. And when innocents in Bosnia and Darfur are slaughtered, that is a stain on our collective conscience. That is what it means to share this world in the 21st century. That is the responsibility we have to one another as human beings.

This is a difficult responsibility to embrace. For human history has often been a record of nations and tribes subjugating one another to serve their own interests. Yet in this new age, such attitudes are self-defeating. Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. So whatever we think of the past, we must not be prisoners of it. Our problems must be dealt with through partnership; progress must be shared.

That does not mean we should ignore sources of tension. Indeed, it suggests the opposite: we must face these tensions squarely. And so in that spirit, let me speak as clearly and plainly as I can about some specific issues that I believe we must finally confront together.

The first issue that we have to confront is violent extremism in all of its forms.

In Ankara, I made clear that America is not - and never will be - at war with Islam. We will, however, relentlessly confront violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security. Because we reject the same thing that people of all faiths reject: the killing of innocent men, women, and children. And it is my first duty as President to protect the American people.

The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America's goals, and our need to work together. Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al Qaeda and the Taliban with broad international support. We did not go by choice, we went because of necessity. I am aware that some question or justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet Al Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with.

Make no mistake: we do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan. We seek no military bases there. It is agonizing for America to lose our young men and women. It is costly and politically difficult to continue this conflict. We would gladly bring every single one of our troops home if we could be confident that there were not violent extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan determined to kill as many Americans as they possibly can. But that is not yet the case.

That's why we're partnering with a coalition of forty-six countries. And despite the costs involved, America's commitment will not weaken. Indeed, none of us should tolerate these extremists. They have killed in many countries. They have killed people of different faiths - more than any other, they have killed Muslims. Their actions are irreconcilable with the rights of human beings, the progress of nations, and with Islam. The Holy Koran teaches that whoever kills an innocent, it is as if he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all mankind. The enduring faith of over a billion people is so much bigger than the narrow hatred of a few. Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism - it is an important part of promoting peace.

We also know that military power alone is not going to solve the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is why we plan to invest $1.5 billion each year over the next five years to partner with Pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who have been displaced. And that is why we are providing more than $2.8 billion to help Afghans develop their economy and deliver services that people depend upon.

Let me also address the issue of Iraq. Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the world. Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible. Indeed, we can recall the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said: "I hope that our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be."

Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a better future - and to leave Iraq to Iraqis. I have made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory or resources. Iraq's sovereignty is its own. That is why I ordered the removal of our combat brigades by next August. That is why we will honor our agreement with Iraq's democratically- elected government to remove combat troops from Iraqi cities by July, and to remove all our troops from Iraq by 2012. We will help Iraq train its Security Forces and develop its economy. But we will support a secure and united Iraq as a partner, and never as a patron.

And finally, just as America can never tolerate violence by extremists, we must never alter our principles. 9/11 was an enormous trauma to our country. The fear and anger that it provoked was understandable, but in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our ideals. We are taking concrete actions to change course. I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year.

So America will defend itself respectful of the sovereignty of nations and the rule of law. And we will do so in partnership with Muslim communities which are also threatened. The sooner the extremists are isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the sooner we will all be safer.

The second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world.

America's strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied.

Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed - more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. Denying that fact is baseless, ignorant, and hateful. Threatening Israel with destruction - or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews - is deeply wrong, and only serves to evoke in the minds of Israelis this most painful of memories while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve.

On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people - Muslims and Christians - have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations - large and small - that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own.

For decades, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive. It is easy to point fingers - for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought by Israel's founding, and for Israelis to point to the constant hostility and attacks throughout its history from within its borders as well as beyond. But if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security.

That is in Israel's interest, Palestine's interest, America's interest, and the world's interest. That is why I intend to personally pursue this outcome with all the patience that the task requires. The obligations that the parties have agreed to under the Road Map are clear. For peace to come, it is time for them - and all of us - to live up to our responsibilities.

Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America's founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It's a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered.

Now is the time for Palestinians to focus on what they can build. The Palestinian Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with institutions that serve the needs of its people. Hamas does have support among some Palestinians, but they also have responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, and to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, recognize past agreements, and recognize Israel's right to exist.

At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.

Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can live, and work, and develop their society. And just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel's security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress.

Finally, the Arab States must recognize that the Arab Peace Initiative was an important beginning, but not the end of their responsibilities. The Arab-Israeli conflict should no longer be used to distract the people of Arab nations from other problems. Instead, it must be a cause for action to help the Palestinian people develop the institutions that will sustain their state; to recognize Israel's legitimacy; and to choose progress over a self-defeating focus on the past.

America will align our policies with those who pursue peace, and say in public what we say in private to Israelis and Palestinians and Arabs. We cannot impose peace. But privately, many Muslims recognize that Israel will not go away. Likewise, many Israelis recognize the need for a Palestinian state. It is time for us to act on what everyone knows to be true.

Too many tears have flowed. Too much blood has been shed. All of us have a responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see their children grow up without fear; when the Holy Land of three great faiths is the place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed (peace be upon them) joined in prayer.

The third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons.

This issue has been a source of tension between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is indeed a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically- elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians. This history is well known. Rather than remain trapped in the past, I have made it clear to Iran's leaders and people that my country is prepared to move forward. The question, now, is not what Iran is against, but rather what future it wants to build.

It will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect. But it is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America's interests. It is about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path.

I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation - including Iran - should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal.

The fourth issue that I will address is democracy.

I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other.

That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere.

There is no straight line to realize this promise. But this much is clear: governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable, successful and secure. Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments - provided they govern with respect for all their people.

This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only when they are out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. No matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy.

The fifth issue that we must address together is religious freedom.

Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country. That is the spirit we need today. People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith based upon the persuasion of the mind, heart, and soul. This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it is being challenged in many different ways.

Among some Muslims, there is a disturbing tendency to measure one's own faith by the rejection of another's. The richness of religious diversity must be upheld - whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. And fault lines must be closed among Muslims as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq.

Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live together. We must always examine the ways in which we protect it. For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat.

Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit - for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism.

Indeed, faith should bring us together. That is why we are forging service projects in America that bring together Christians, Muslims, and Jews. That is why we welcome efforts like Saudi Arabian King Abdullah's Interfaith dialogue and Turkey's leadership in the Alliance of Civilizations. Around the world, we can turn dialogue into Interfaith service, so bridges between peoples lead to action - whether it is combating malaria in Africa, or providing relief after a natural disaster.

The sixth issue that I want to address is women's rights.

I know there is debate about this issue. I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well-educated are far more likely to be prosperous.

Now let me be clear: issues of women's equality are by no means simply an issue for Islam. In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia, we have seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the struggle for women's equality continues in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world.

Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity - men and women - to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. That is why the United States will partner with any Muslim- majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro -financing that helps people live their dreams.

Finally, I want to discuss economic development and opportunity.

I know that for many, the face of globalization is contradictory. The Internet and television can bring knowledge and information, but also offensive sexuality and mindless violence. Trade can bring new wealth and opportunities, but also huge disruptions and changing communities. In all nations - including my own - this change can bring fear. Fear that because of modernity we will lose of control over our economic choices, our politics, and most importantly our identities - those things we most cherish about our communities, our families, our traditions, and our faith.

But I also know that human progress cannot be denied. There need not be contradiction between development and tradition. Countries like Japan and South Korea grew their economies while maintaining distinct cultures. The same is true for the astonishing progress within Muslim-majority countries from Kuala Lumpur to Dubai. In ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of innovation and education.

This is important because no development strategy can be based only upon what comes out of the ground, nor can it be sustained while young people are out of work. Many Gulf States have enjoyed great wealth as a consequence of oil, and some are beginning to focus it on broader development. But all of us must recognize that education and innovation will be the currency of the 21st century, and in too many Muslim communities there remains underinvestment in these areas. I am emphasizing such investments within my country. And while America in the past has focused on oil and gas in this part of the world, we now seek a broader engagement.

On education, we will expand exchange programs, and increase scholarships, like the one that brought my father to America, while encouraging more Americans to study in Muslim communities. And we will match promising Muslim students with internships in America; invest in on-line learning for teachers and children around the world; and create a new online network, so a teenager in Kansas can communicate instantly with a teenager in Cairo.

On economic development, we will create a new corps of business volunteers to partner with counterparts in Muslim-majority countries. And I will host a Summit on Entrepreneurship this year to identify how we can deepen ties between business leaders, foundations and social entrepreneurs in the United States and Muslim communities around the world.

On science and technology, we will launch a new fund to support technological development in Muslim-majority countries, and to help transfer ideas to the marketplace so they can create jobs. We will open centers of scientific excellence in Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia, and appoint new Science Envoys to collaborate on programs that develop new sources of energy, create green jobs, digitize records, clean water, and grow new crops. And today I am announcing a new global effort with the Organization of the Islamic Conference to eradicate polio. And we will also expand partnerships with Muslim communities to promote child and maternal health.

All these things must be done in partnership. Americans are ready to join with citizens and governments; community organizations, religious leaders, and businesses in Muslim communities around the world to help our people pursue a better life.

The issues that I have described will not be easy to address. But we have a responsibility to join together on behalf of the world we seek - a world where extremists no longer threaten our people, and American troops have come home; a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own, and nuclear energy is used for peaceful purposes; a world where governments serve their citizens, and the rights of all God's children are respected. Those are mutual interests. That is the world we seek. But we can only achieve it together.

I know there are many - Muslim and non-Muslim - who question whether we can forge this new beginning. Some are eager to stoke the flames of division, and to stand in the way of progress. Some suggest that it isn't worth the effort - that we are fated to disagree, and civilizations are doomed to clash. Many more are simply skeptical that real change can occur. There is so much fear, so much mistrust. But if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward. And I want to particularly say this to young people of every faith, in every country - you, more than anyone, have the ability to remake this world.

All of us share this world for but a brief moment in time. The question is whether we spend that time focused on what pushes us apart, or whether we commit ourselves to an effort - a sustained effort - to find common ground, to focus on the future we seek for our children, and to respect the dignity of all human beings.

It is easier to start wars than to end them. It is easier to blame others than to look inward; to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There is also one rule that lies at the heart of every religion - that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. This truth transcends nations and peoples - a belief that isn't new; that isn't black or white or brown; that isn't Christian, or Muslim or Jew. It's a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the heart of billions. It's a faith in other people, and it's what brought me here today.

We have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the courage to make a new beginning, keeping in mind what has been written.

The Holy Koran tells us, "O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another". The Talmud tells us: "The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of promoting peace."

The Holy Bible tells us, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God". The people of the world can live together in peace. We know that is God's vision. Now, that must be our work here on Earth. Thank you. And may God's peace be upon you.

(Cairo University, 04 June 2009)

SKB RI-Rusia Ibarat Pembuka Kran Masalah

11/12/2008 11:21 wib - Internasional Aktual

London, CyberNews. Dubes Indonesia untuk Rusia, Hamid Awaludin mengatakan Sidang Komisi Bersama (SKB) RI-Rusia berakhir, kini tinggal bagaimana mengimplementasikan seluruh kesepakatan yang dibuat bersama.

"Setelah SKB, baik Indonesia maupun Rusia harus menggunakan bahasa yang sama, yakni bahasa Implementasi," ujar Dubes seperti disampaikan Counsellor KBRI Moskow, M. Aji Surya, Kamis.

Dubes mengatakan bahwa pencapaian dari SKB adalah implementasi, bukan sekedar pembuatan program. Menurut M. Aji Surya, sebanyak 51 anggota delegasi Sidang Komisi Bersama RI-Rusia (SKB) mulai meninggalkan kota Moskow yang dingin membeku.

Suasana hangatnya perundingan bilateral tersebut tidak terasa lagi di KBRI yang berada di jantung kota termahal di dunia. Sisa-sisa dokumen yang tidak terpakai mulai dibenahi. Kini, semua kembali ke kondisi normal.

Menghadapi paska SKB, Dubes Hamid Awaluddin memiliki catatan penting. "Saya sering sampaikan SKB adalah 'kran' yang mengalirkan masalah yang tersumbat dan tidak lancar."

Menurut Dubes, dari SKB ke-5 di Moskow ini ia melihat banyak kegiatan memiliki prospek bagi hubungan bilateral kedua Negara di tahun medatang. "Kini kita punya modal bergerak maju, tidak stagnan," ujar dubes.

Diakuinya berbagai sumbatan yang berhasil diatasi dalam SKB antara lain dalam perdagangan, pariwisata dan transportasi. "Semua itu merupakan mata rantai yang saling mengait."

Dengan target penerbangan langsung dari Rusia ke Indonesia tahun depan maka arus wisatawan jadi lancar. Diharapkanya tahun depan wisatawan Rusia ke Indonesia lebih dari seratus ribu.

Sementara itu, perdagangan yang telah mencapai target satu milyar dolar juga dapat ditingkatkan melalui kerjasama kedua Kadin dan Business Council yang segera berdiri. Diharapkan Rusia lebih banyak membeli produk dan menanamkan modalnya di Indonesia dan dengan penerbangan langsung tidak hanya membawa penumpang, tapi juga kargo.

Diakuinya kesepakatan yang paling spektakuler adalah kerjasama budaya dalam bentuk peringatan 60 tahun hubungan diplomatik kedua negara. Dalam SKB itu disepakati peringatan besar-besaran dalam bentuk pameran budaya baik di kota-kota besar di Indonesia maupun Rusia.

Ini sangat penting dalam rangka peningkatan pemahaman kedua masyarakat, "people-to-people contact." Dampak dari kegiatan semacam ini tentunya akan menguntungkan kedua bangsa. Dalam tataran praktis, kedua negara sepakat memperkuat kerjasama di bidang perbankan dan turisme.

Saat ini Alfa Bank Rusia telah bermitra dengan Bank Mandiri. Disayangkan, wakil dari perbankan Indonesia tidak hadir dalam SKB padahal counterpart-nya dari Rusia datang, ujar dubes. Dubes mengharapan turis Rusia akan membeludak di tahun depan asal semua pihak konsisten.

Dalam protokol disebutkan akan ada "joint promotion on tourism," pelatihan bahasa Rusia bagi pemandu wisata Indonesia hingga kunjungan media Rusia ke tempat-tempat wisata di Nusantara. Bahkan Pemerintah Rusia juga akan mendorong masyarakatnya untuk berkunjung ke 10 tujuan wisata di luar Bali.

Untuk itu, di awal tahun depan, KBRI dan Depbudpar sepakat mengundang dan menfasilitasi tour operator Rusia ke Indonesia. "Kerjasama investasi juga akan terus didorong meskipun investasi adalah kegiatan yang sering dinilai beresiko," ujarnya.

Dubes mengatakan bahwa ia mendesak Rusia agar segera mengimplementasikan rencananya untuk investasi di bidang teknologi, energy, minyak dan gas, komuniasi hingga perkebunan. Diakuinya secara rutin ia akan mengadakan pertemuan dengan pebisnis Rusia dan pebisnis Indonesia karena investasi tidak datang begitu saja.

Kendala utama dari berbagai kesepakatan yang ada berada dalam diri sendiri. "Adakah kesadaran untuk melaksanakan ataukan cukup puas berhenti pada kertas yang tak bermakna," tanyanya.

Dubes mengatakan KBRI berusaha untuk mengamati ke 62 butir kesepakatan selanjutnya dapat mengimplementasian secara maksimal. "Bila ada masalah di tengah jalan, dirinya bersama Dubes Ivanov di Jakarta berusaha untuk menyesaikan," kata Dubes Hamid Awaludin.

SUARA MERDEKA

Kamis, 25 Oktober 2007 NASIONAL
CATATAN KUNJUNCGAN ABBAS(2-Habis)
Israel Selalu Buyarkan Usaha Penyelesaian Konflik

SELAMA ini Israel selalu berusaha membuyarkan usaha-usaha penyelesaian konflik. Karena itu, mengherankan kalau perlawanan rakyat Palestina makin meningkat, disebabkan oleh sikap Palestina yang membuat penyele-saian masalah Palestina tidak jelas. Sikap Israel itu tidak jelas, bisa karena Israel benar-benar ingin merealisasikan cita-citanya untuk membentuk Israel Raya yang wilayahnya mencakup berbagai negara di sekitarnya atau, untuk mempertahankan kondisi perang dengan rakyat Palestina karena ancaman bangsa Arab.

Ada alasan pula bahwa Israel tidak akan menghentikan keadaan perang di Timur Tengah. Israel akan tetap berusaha memelihara ketegangan di kawasan itu. Sebab, kalau situasi di Timur Tengah tenang dan damai, maka Israel tak akan mendapat bantuan lagi yang jumlahnya bermiliar-miliar dolar setiap tahun.

Untuk menyelesaikan konflik Israel-Palestina, keduanya perlu belajar dari sejarah. Jika sejarah selalu dijadikan acuan, mungkin konflik Israel-Palestina tidak akan terjadi. Mereka harus sadar bahwa masalah Timur Tengah tidak bisa dipecahkan dengan kekuatan senjata. Masalah itu hanya bisa diselesaikan oleh kehendak baik dari kedua pihak yang bersengketa dengan para pendukungnya.

Meskipun Peta Jalan Damai sudah ditawarkan, kiranya Israel, tidak makin lunak sikapnya terhadap bangsa Palestina. Hal itu terjadi karena masih ada kendala klasik, yakni belum semua negara Arab mau meninggalkan sikap mau meniadakan Israel, seperti yang dikhawatirkan Israel selama ini.

Karena itu, Amerika Serikat tidak mungkin menarik dukungannya kepada Israel, baik secara material maupun militer apabila belum ada jaminan keamanan bagi Israel.

Damai

Sisi lain, kemerdekaan bangsa Palestina dari penjajahan Israel tak akan pernah terwujud tanpa persatuan internal terlebih dahulu. Diplomasi dalam bentuk apa pun sia-sia selama persatuan bangsa Palestina belum terwujud.

''Saya sampaikan kepada Presiden Palestina Mahmoud Abbas, bahwa semua komponen di Palestina harus bersatu dulu. Setelah bersatu, baru akan ada potensi untuk merdeka. Kalau tidak, diplomasi apa pun tidak akan berhasil''ujar Ketua Umum PBNU Hasyim Muzadi yang juga Presiden World Conference on Religions for Peace.

Indonesia mempunyai pengalaman karena mengalami kolonialisme lebih lama, lima kali dari Palestina yang hanya 60 tahun. Baru setelah menjelang tahun 1945, ada potensi untuk merdeka karena seluruh agama dan berbagai elemen yang ada di Indonesia bersatu.

Itu yang juga juga diceritakan kepada Presiden Abbas akan pengalaman bangsa Indonesia dijajah selama 350 tahun. Selama itulah, Indonesia tak pernah merdeka karena masih terpecah-belah. Sekarang antara Hamas dan Fatah adalah dua kelompok di Palestina yang selama ini bertikai.

Yang terpenting penyelenggaraan konferensi internasional mengenai masalah Palestina-Israel yang digagas Amerika Serikat pada akhir bulan November atau awal Desember tahun ini konferensi tersebut harus menitikberatkan pada rekonsiliasi internal Palestina. Jika saja Palestina belum mencapai kemerdekaan, tetapi sudah bersatu, maka hal itu sudah cukup terhormat daripada sudah meloncat pada tujuan merdeka tetapi masih berada dalam keadaan tercabik-cabik.

Oelh karena dipertanyakan sikap Presiden Mahmoud Abbas yang lebih terbuka untuk berdialog dengan pihak Israel dibanding dengan kelompok Hamas. Kenapa mereka berunding lebih dulu dengan Israel. Kenapa tidak dengan Hammas padahal Hamas pemenang pemilu Palestina sebanyak 70 persen.

Muncul saran jalan terbaik untuk mendamaikan kedua kelompok yang bertikai di Palestina itu adalah dengan menaati kembali perjanjian Mekkah di mana Presiden Mahmoud melakukan perjanjian dengan Perdana Mentri Ismail Haniyah, karena ini adalah masalah internal Palestina.

Fatah bukanlah musuh Hammas, begitupun sebaliknya. Sehingga pertikaian keduanya harus diakhiri salah satunya dengan membuka pintu dialog. Mereka adalah bersaudara. Haram merampas harta menumpahkan darah dan menghinakan kehormatan saudaranya. Jika tidak diakhir, jalan terjal masih menghadang perdamaian Palestina-Isarel. (A Adib-77)

CATATAN KHUSUS KUNJUNGAN ABBAS

SUARA MERDEKA
Rabu, 24 Oktober 2007

Terjal, Perdamaian Palestina-Israel

KETIKA KH Abdurrahman Wahid (Gus Dur) terpilih menjadi Presiden RI, sejumlah media massa Israel menyambut gembira, dengan menyebutnya sebagai "Israels Asian Friend". Menarik dicermati sambutan media Israel, karena sebelumnya Gus Dur melakukan lawatan ke Jerusalem, Israel akhir Juni 1994. Salah satu yang istimewa adalah keterlibatannya dalam proses perdamaian antara dua bangsa di Timur Tengah yang telah lama bertikai Palestina-Israel.

Di antara mantan Presiden Uni Sovyet dan Afrika Selatan Mikail Gorbachev dan FW De Klerk, mantan PM Israel dan Inggris Ehud Barak dan John Major, Gus Dur satu-satunya tokoh Asia yang diajak berperan membahas peluang dan prospek pascadisepakatinya peta jalan damai yang akan berdampak bukan saja pada stabilitas kawasan Timur Tengah, tapi juga internasional.

Perhatian Gus Dur terhadap perdamaian di daerah krisis paling alot di dunia memang telah lama. Di saat bangsa ini berantipati terhadap Israel, Gus Dur tahun 1994 beranjangsana ke negara mayoritas berpenduduk Yahudi itu.

Dan berselang kemudian didaulat menjadi salah satu anggota pendiri lembaga swadaya masyarakat pimpinan mantan PM Israel, Simon Peres, The Peres Center for Peace. Mestinya ada kebanggaan jika diakui sebagai sahabat sebuah negara, namun bagi Indonesia yang mayoritas berpenduduk muslim, hal itu dapat dianggap sebagai stigma. Stigma itulah yang kemudian digunakan sebagai salah satu senjata oleh lawan-lawan politik Gus Dur untuk melengserkan dari kursi kepresidenan. Itulah risiko.

Keberadaan Gus Dur sebagai salah satu tokoh Islam yang didengarkan lingkaran Yahudi ternyata bermanfaat bagi bangsa Palestina khususnya, dan Islam umumnya ditambah dampak positif bagi terciptanya perdamaian dunia.

Jalan Terjal

Peta perdamaian yang disusun secara internasional adalah untuk mengakhiri konflik di Timteng serta Israel-Palestina menuju pengakuan adanya negara Israel oleh dunia internasional (termasuk semua negara Arab) serta pembentukan negara Palestina yang merdeka penuh.

Rencana itu dirintis melalui konferensi Tingkat Tinggi (KTT) Aqaba dan di KTT AS-Arab di Kota Sarm Al Sheikh, Mesir. Rencana itu menuntut Israel menghentikan pembangunan permukiman Yahudi dan membongkar pos-pos terdepan yang selama ini dibiarkan oleh pemerintah, meskipun secara resmi dianggap ilegal. Di sisi lain, Palestina harus menghentikan semua perlawanan bersenjata terhadap Israel.

Banyak konsep disusun lembaga-lembaga internasional, pakar politik tentang masalah Timur Tengah, para diplomat yang dikirim PBB dan yang dikirim oleh negara-negara cinta damai, tetapi belum diketemukan cara yang paling tepat untuk mengatasinya. Konflik Israel-Palestina selalu muncul ke permukaan.

Meskipun Israel sebagai bangsa yang berkuasa di wilayah Palestina itu, namun kerisauannya tidak lebih kendur bila dibanding dengan kerisauan rakyat Palestina yang dikuasainya. Penduduk kedua bangsa itu terus-menerus dicekam oleh keadaan perang tak berujung.

Sebelum Perang Dunia I, wilayah Palestina di bawah kekuasaan Ottoman (Osmaniah). Setelah itu wilayah ini jatuh ke tangan Sekutu, yang diperkuat dalam perjanjian Sykes-Picot (1916) tentang pembagian wilayah antara Prancis dan Inggris.

Ketika orang-orang Arab berpihak kepada Sekutu untuk melawan Turki, Inggris justru menjanjikan kepada pihak Arab suatu negara Arab bersatu atas jazirah Arab.

Tetapi pada saat yang sama di tahun 1917, Inggris menjanjikan suatu national home bagi orang-orang Yahudi yang terkenal dengan Pernyataan Balfour.

Pernyataan itu kemudian dimanfaatkan oleh gerakan Zionis Internasional yang terus mengadakan imigrasi orang-orang Yahudi dari seantero dunia.

Pihak Zionis dengan tokoh-tokoh seperti Chaim Weizmann, Ben Guiron dan lain-lain bekerja sama dengan kolonial Inggris di Palestina. Keadaan itu menimbulkan amarah orang-orang Arab, yang sejak 1920 terus melakukan aksi-aksi protes dan perang bersenjata melawan orang Inggris dan Zionis.

Perlawanan orang-orang Arab Palestina berada di bawah pimpinan Haji Amin El Hussainy yang terus dikejar-kejar oleh penguasa kolonial Inggris dan gerakan Zionis, dengan organisasi-organisasi semacam Irgun Zwai Liumi, Stern Gang dan lain-lain.

Dua tahun setelah Perang Dunia kedua berakhir, PBB mengeluarkan resolusi yang membagi Palestina ke dalam dua bagian. Satu bagian bagi kaum Zionis Yahudi (56%), dan lainnya (44%) untuk orang-orang Arab. Suara di PBB adalah 33 mendukung, 13 menentang dan 10 abstain.

Sejak saat itu gerakan Zionis memaksa orang-orang Arab keluar dari daerahnya serta wilayah tersebut dianeksasi.

Dalam perkembangannya, Mei 1948 orang-orang Yahudi memproklamasikan berdirinya negara Israel. Secara kontan didukung dan diakui beberapa menit saja, setelah proklamasi negara baru itu, oleh negara-negara besar, seperti Amerika Serikat, Rusia, Inggris dan Prancis.

Bangsa Arab mencoba mengusir bangsa Israel dengan kekuatan senjata, sehingga berkobarlah perang Arab-Israel mulai tahun 1948 sampai tahun 1973. Perang-perang itu telah membawa kerugian besar di kedua pihak, khususnya bangsa Arab.

Berdasarkan pengalaman-pengalaman dari perang terbuka itu, tampaknya pihak yang terlibat sadar masalah Timur Tengah tidak bisa dipecahkan dengan kekuatan senjata, tapi harus lewat perundingan.

Sayangnya negara-negara Arab yang kaya dan kuat, tetapi terkotak-kotak sehingga menggunakan cara dan jalan apapun akhirnya lemah juga. Kondisi itu memperjelas betapa lemahnya posisi negara-negara Arab dalam mendukung Palestina. (A Adib-77)

Menyimak Kemenangan PKP di Turki

Jumat, 27 Juli 2007,

Rasanya, kita sudah terlalu sering mengkaji banyak soal dari Timur Tengah, terutama dari negara-negara Arab. Aspek pemikiran sosial-politik-keagaman di sana, sampai soal pergerakannya, hampir khatam kita kaji.

Sebaliknya, Turki hampir tak terpikir dalam benak kita. Baru soal jilbab dan kebab, Turki dikenal di negeri ini. Untuk perkara jilbab, Turki dikecam. Untuk urusan kebab, Turki diidam.

Kini, bukan hanya soal jilbab dan kebab Turki yang perlu dikaji. Dinamika sosial-politik Turki belakangan ini sungguh menarik. Dalam lima tahun terakhir (2002-2007), sebuah partai Islam bernama Partai Keadilan dan Pembangunan (PKP) dianggap sukses memimpin Turki.

Karena itu, dalam pemilu legislatif pekan lalu, PKP kembali dipercaya mengisi mayoritas kursi di parlemen Turki (47 persen atau 341 di antara 550 anggota perlemen).

Sukses PKP boleh jadi membesarkan hati partai-partai yang punya spirit agama Islam di tempat lain. Tapi, tak gampang menjadi partai Islam mirip PKP. Sejarah politik Turki mungkin telah membuat mereka matang untuk tidak lagi terjebak dalam kubangan sloganisme sebuah partai agama. Karena itu, setidaknya selama lima tahun terakhir, mereka tidak gegabah menyuguhkan agenda-agenda Islamisme kepada rakyat Turki.

PKP konsisten berada dalam bingkai sekularisme. Bahkan, para petingginya, seperti Recep Erdogan, seakan hendak menunjukkan bahwa ajaran Islam selaras dengan praktik sekularisme politik.

Beberapa hari setelah menang pemilu, dia menyatakan tetap berada dalam garis besar haluan Musthafa Kemal Attaturk, pendiri Turki modern. Partainya menolak formalisasi agama, berhubungan secara wajar dengan Israel, dan pandai bergaul di lingkungan internasional.

Karena itu, kolomnis harian As-Syarqul Awsat Abdurrahman Rasyid menilai, PKP tidaklah segaris dengan kaum revivalis Islam di tempat lain yang terjun ke dunia politik praktis. Kaum revivalis Islam di tempat lain tidak pantas menepuk dada atas suksesnya PKP. Sebab, baik dalam wacana maupun performa politik, PKP lebih liberal daripada partai-partai Islam di mana pun.

Sampai kini, PKP tak pernah menunjukkan gelagat sebagai partai Islam yang anti kebebasan. Mereka juga tidak terobsesi untuk menyeragamkan penampilan konstituen perempuannya dengan jilbab, tidak antibunga bank, bahkan tidak canggung bertandang ke Tel Aviv atau menjamu para petinggi Israel di Ankara. Jangankan dalam tindakan, dalam wacana pun, isu itu sangat dihindari kaum Islamis di tempat lain.

Kinerja pemerintahtan Turki pada masa PM Erdogan pun dianggap cukup membanggakan. Dalam sejarah Turki, PKP paling sukses mewujudkan pertumbuhan ekonomi. Investasi luar dan dalam negeri meningkat, sektor pariwisata bergeliat. Keberhasilan itu sudah cukup untuk menutup kekecewaan rakyat Turki karena diombang-ambing Uni Eropa untuk masuk klub negara-negara maju tersebut.

Erdogan juga dinilai berhasil menjaga keseimbangan politik dalam negeri Turki, sehingga hampir semua segmen masyarakat Turki yakin akan kepemimpinan PKP. Hubungan internasional Turki dengan negara-negara lain membaik, bahkan isu separatisme Kurdi mereda.

Namun, di balik optimisme itu, masih tersisa kesangsian terhadap PKP. Terutama setelah mereka sukses menguasai mayoritas kursi di parlemen dan kemungkinan akan memuluskan langkah Abdullah Gul menjadi presiden Turki. Bukan hanya militer yang jadi pengawal setia sekularisme Turki yang harap-harap cemas. Dunia pun sedang menunggu: apakah PKP memang beda atau setali tiga uang dengan watak partai kaum Islamis lainnya.

Jika PKP tetap bermain cantik dalam politik, setia pada konstitusi Turki, fokus pada pembangunan sosial-ekonomi, dan tidak mengajukan slogan Islam adalah solusi, ia layak menjadi teladan bagi partai-partai Islam di tempat lain. Tapi, jika terlalu berambisi mengambil semua dan melakukan revolusi Islam terhadap tatanan sosial-politik Turki, itulah mungkin awal kekalahannya. [novriantoni]