Peter Ryan

It's Bigger Than you Think...

by Peter Ryan

Last week, President Obama, in keeping with tradition, took the oath of office under his full, legal name: Barack Hussein Obama.

On the campaign trail, "Hussein" was a word rarely uttered by Obama supporters– and oft mentioned by his foes. It became a code word for something unnatural and nefarious, a manchurian candidate level conspiracy never quite defined, only hinted at– that President Obama was secretly a Muslim, despite all evidence to the contrary, or, more importantly, and more generally, that he was something "other"– foreign, muslim, arab... it didn't matter which, all that mattered was that he wasn't "one of us," he was "one of them."

It's time to embrace, rather than shy from, that difference. It's time for us to make crystal clear, and not just implicitly clear, that: yes, indeed, you can have a Semetic name and still be "one of us"– still be America. It's time for President Obama's supporters to shout the name "Hussein" from the rooftops, rather than his opponents.

If "Saddam Hussein" were the first, or most important, public figure to bear the name, it might indeed be an embarrassment– but he isn't.

One of the most succinct summaries on this point comes from professor Juan Cole:

"Barack Obama's middle name is in honor of his grandfather, Hussein, a secular resident of Nairobi. Americans may think of Saddam Hussein when they hear the name, but that is like thinking of Stalin when you hear the name Joseph. There have been lots of Husseins in history, from the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad, a hero who touched the historian Gibbon, to King Hussein of Jordan, one of America's most steadfast allies in the 20th century. The author of the beloved American novel, The Kite Runner, is Khaled Hosseini. "

Hussein is an extremely common name because, like Joseph, it is the name of an important religious figure–Husayn Ibn Ali.

If Saddam is the only Hussein you know, the following list might be informative. Let's take a look at some of the notable personalities in the Hussein "family" clan:

(Note that because Hussein is transliterated, it appears in many different forms: Husayn, Hussein, Hosain, etc. Don't get confused– it's all the same name).

Husayn ibn Ali grandson of the Islamic prophet Muhammad In all likelihood, long after Saddam Hussein and Barack Obama have ceased to be household names, Husayn Ibn Ali will still be a topic of intense discussion in many parts of the world. One of the most revered and respected Islamic figures, Husayn is venerated by Shia muslims as a martyr and commemorated in a day of mourning (ashura).

Hussein bin Talal King of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan According to CNN: "Hussein guided his country through the volatile Cold War and four decades of Arab-Israeli conflict, successfully balancing the pressures of Arab nationalism and the allure of Western-style development against the stark reality of Jordan's geographic location. He left Jordan economically stronger and politically stable." His son is currently King.

Robert Hossein French-Iranian film actor, director and writer. Directed the 1982 adaption of Les Misérables.

Hussein el-Husseini Former Lebanese Parliament Speaker. A Lebanese politician and a lifelong advocate for democracy and transparency, el-Husseini is best known for presiding over the Taif Agreement, which brought an end to the Lebanese civil war.

Taha Hussein Egyptian writer and Arabic literary scholar Blind by age three, Taha Hussein grew up to become one of the Arab world's most celebrated literary critics. He was nominated for a nobel prize and became the first Egyptian Dean of the Faculy of arts at the modern Egyptian University. Never bowing to controversy, Hussein caused a stir when he questioned the authenticity of pre-islamic poetry, an idea that had religious ramifications. He was tried for apostasy but never convicted.

M.F. Hussain Eminent artist from India Called the "Picasso of India" by Forbes Magazine, M.F. Hussain is one of the country's best known modern artists. He's also no stranger to controversy and has created works that have upset both Hindu and Muslim religious groups.

Muhammad Husayn Haykal Egyptian writer, journalist, politician and a former Minister of Education in Egypt Husayn Haykal authored Zeinab, which is considered to be the first modern Egyptian novel.

This is by no means and exhaustive list. "Hussein" is such a common name that there are also of plenty of negative associations one could pin on the President other than Saddam (for example Muhammad Hussein Fadallah, considered by some to be a spiritual leader of the Lebanese movement Hizbollah).

When Americans hear the "H" word, understandably, the only memory triggered is a snapshot of the former dictator of Iraq.

But as President Obama tries to grapple with a myriad of middle east policy issues, his middle name is less a political crisis and more an opportunity. Think of it this way: despite all other considerations, if the President of Iran were named "Bob" instead of Ahmadinejad, we couldn't help but look at him differently. What hurt Obama politically in the campaign might actually help him advance his policy abroad–that is, if we actually allow our President to introduce himself properly.

Our President isn't a Bill or a George or a Bob–his name is Barack Hussein Obama. And that, as far as I can tell, is a very good thing.

by Peter Ryan

"He has a great PR machine and he has people thinking he's a moderate but he's really just Jerry Falwell in a Hawaiian shirt."
        – Rob Boston, Americans United for Separation of Church and State (Countdown          with Keith Olberman, December 18th, 2008).

"If I cannot pray with Rick Warren, I realize, then I am not worthy of being called a Christian. And if I cannot engage him, then I am not worthy of being called a writer. And if we cannot work with Obama to bridge these divides, none of us will be worthy of the great moral cause that this civil rights movement truly is."
        -Andrew Sullivan

Reverend Jeremiah Wright and Pastor Rick Warren have served as the controversial spiritual book ends of Obama's upward path to the White House. The average American viewer now knows two things about Jeremiah Wright: that he's "racist" and that he "hates America." They now know two things about Rick Warren: that he's pro-life and that he's against gay marriage.

Those are the pre-approved, ten second soundbytes–and, sorry, that's all you get. Not because they lack the time to show you more, these 24 hour news stations have nothing but time to provide in depth analysis. The reason they won't show you a more 3-dimensional perspective on either of these men is because that would be incredibly dull. It's a whole lot more fun to sum a guy up in ten seconds flat and then spend the next half an hour lining up pundit after pundit to take a crack at him. Being the news junkie that I am, I get some sort of weird, depraved sense of satisfaction watching public figures get eaten alive by inane controversy–it's an impulse the represents the worst, not the best, in us, in the way that feeding Christians to the lions once passed as "entertainment."

by Peter Ryan

In a last desperate attempt to smear presidential candidate Barack Obama, the McCain campaign brought up Obama's "ties" to professor, author and historian Rashid Khalidi.

Liberal pundits have charged back that John McCain served as chairman of the International Republican Institute when it provided grants worth $500,000 to the Center for Palestine Research and Studies which Khalidi co-founded. It was apparently the only group conducting Palestinian polling at the time (apparently, even polling data, normally seen as fairly dry topic, becomes scandalous when you put the word "Palestinian" in front of it).

Both political camps in this fight are correct. McCain helped grant money to a Khalidi associated group to conduct polling and research and Obama participated in events and met with Khalidi.

Now the important question: So what?

Why do we care what connections the candidates have to Rashid Khalidi? Is he a terrorist? Is he anti semitic? Is he a radical? Well, actually, no. Far from it.

In a recent article in Harper's magazine, the New McCarthyism, Scott Horton offers this perspective on Khalidi, a public figure whose career he has followed attentively for a number of years:

Rashid Khalidi is an American academic of extraordinary ability and sharp insights. He is also deeply committed to stemming violence in the Middle East, promoting a culture that embraces human rights as a fundamental notion, and building democratic societies. In a sense, Khalidi’s formula for solving the Middle East crisis has not been radically different from George W. Bush’s: both believe in American values and approaches. However, whereas Bush believes these values can be introduced in the wake of bombs and at the barrel of a gun, Khalidi disagrees. He sees education and civic activism as the path to success, and he argues that pervasive military interventionism has historically undermined the Middle East and will continue to do so. Khalidi has also been one of the most articulate critics of the PLO and the Palestinian Authority—calling them repeatedly on their anti-democratic tendencies and their betrayals of their own principles.

by Peter Ryan

According to Syrian media, on October 26th, 2008 four U.S. helicopters based in Iraq launched a deadly airstrike on a farm under construction about five miles from the Iraq-Syria border. According to CNN, "a U.S. official who did not want to be identified said U.S. gunships fired near the Syria-Iraq border and successfully targeted Abu Ghadiya, an Iraqi suspected of working with al Qaeda to smuggle money, weapons and foreign fighters into Iraq."

According to Syrian accounts, eight civilians were killed in the attack.

The following day reporters asked Department of State spokesperson Sean McCormack about the U.S. air strike and about Syria's role in preventing fighters from entering Iraq. Here is what he had to say:

QUESTION: Are you satisfied with Syria’s help to prevent fighters to go to Iraq?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, look, I think I will – I guess I’ll respond to Lach’s question a bit here. I’ll let the folks at the Pentagon describe in any detail how they view the situation. I think it – there was – there has been, over the years, a changed situation. We read a lot about infiltration over the Syrian border into Iraq quite a bit three, four years ago, a couple years ago; less so now. That doesn’t mean that it’s not – there aren’t continuing issues in that regard.

In a related question, he gave his summary of improvements Syria has made:

MR. MCCORMACK: Look, Syria knows what it needs to do in order to play a different role in the region. It has taken some steps in a positive direction. I would note, for example, their decision to establish diplomatic relations with Lebanon. It’s a positive step. And of course, their decision that they took with the Israelis to have contacts via the Turkish Government about coming to a peace settlement. So those are certainly positive steps, but again, there’s still a ways to go.

Deputy spokesman Robert wood, echoed these sentiments yesterday, October 28th:

MR. WOOD: No, I don’t. But let me just say, as Sean said yesterday, with regard to, you know, the flow of foreign fighters across the border, the Syrians have made, in the past, some -– taken some steps in the right direction. But there’s a lot that they need to do, and we have spoken to Syria about what they need to do.

It is a very strange thing that, a few days after violating Syrian sovereignty and bombing a target within Syria's borders, that a U.S. representative should essentially praise the "positive steps" Syria has made. Certainly Mr. McCormack and Mr. Wood make it clear that we are not perfectly happy with Syria and its role in the region, but there is a general and pervasive sense that Syria is moving in the right direction.

If we were really cautiously optimistic about Syria and its efforts, why did we risk fragile diplomatic efforts on a single, high-risk military strike? Did we really not imagine that this would tarnish U.S.-Syrian relations, that this would make it harder, rather than easier, to seek Syria's cooperation on pivotal issues-such as halting the flow of foreign fighters?

by Peter Ryan

The next President of the United States will face severe challenges. Global warming. An economic downturn. An exploding national deficit. A broken health care system. Dual insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan. A whole generation of returning veterans facing post-deployment challenges. An Iraqi refugee crisis. An energy crisis. A slim window for peace between Palestinians and Israelis. A moral and legal battle as we face up to our treatment of detainees. However you slice it up, and whichever issues you care about, it's a terrible time to take the White House.

Sorting through the litany Middle East policy issues, in particular, will be a challenge. Most of the next four to eight years will need to be spent on damage control: repairing the crises and conflicts which, in some cases, we helped create. This article series is intended to be a field guide for the next president, combing through some of his best first moves in grappling with the future of our policies in the Middle East.

Introduction: Dear President Obama/McCain
Part One: Israel and Palestine
+ 1) Call for a settlement freeze–and set conditions on U.S. aid to Israel.
+ 2) Make an immediate personal visit to both countries.
+ 3) Take a Risk–Speak Frankly.
+ 4) Involve Neighboring Arab States.
+ 5) Yes, through intermediaries, talk to Hamas.
+ 6) Call for an End to the Gaza Siege.
Part Two: Iraqi Refugees
+ 7) Put the Refugee Crisis in Focus.
+ 8) Make a SERIOUS Commitment to Resettle Refugees.
+ 9) Reinstall the U.S. Ambassador to Syria.

Next Week: Negotiating Iran

by Peter Ryan

It would be racist not to vote for Obama simply because he is black. Wouldn't it be equally racist not to vote for Obama because he was "Arab"?

If we needed any further evidence that prejudice against those of Arab descent has become the last publicly acceptable form of racism in American society, we have only to turn our attention to developments in the Presidential campaign these past few weeks. The most hostile attacks lobbed against Senator Obama? He's a Muslim. He's an Arab. He has a foreign name.

Above: A collection of photoshopped images on the web trying to peg Obama as a Muslim or an Arab and a T-shirt emphasizing his full name.

Obama, in fact, is not an Arab. Nor is he a Muslim. He is a Christian with a deeply rooted faith in Jesus Christ which he speaks of openly, as he did at the Saddleback Forum. At the forum, Rick Warren, one of the most influential evangelicals of his day, expressed a deep admiration and personal affinity for both Senator Obama and Senator McCain.

But what worries me most is not that the presidential elections have gone negative. It's not that some candidates feel that they can get away with completely baseless accusations and inneundos. What really worries me is not the campaign itself but what the campaign has revealed: there is a big chunk of this country that still feels it's okay to be racist as long as their targets are Arab. And there is a even bigger chunk of this country that sees any Muslim, regardless of their world view or ideology, as "an enemy."

Kelly Hayes-Raitt discusses the Iraqi refugee crisis in Syria and Jordan. You can learn more about Kelly's experiences in Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq at her website: Peace Path Foundation.

Interviewer: Peter Ryan.

Listen Now