May 21, 2017

Trump isn't telling them what to do, but he is telling them what to do.

Here's the full transcript of Trump's speech in Saudi Arabia, which I listened to live. I want to pick out a few things:
I stand before you as a representative of the American People, to deliver a message of friendship and hope....
Trump selects a theme of hope — not, say, carnage, which some people think was the theme of his inaugural address. He doesn't think that, of course. In fact, he brings up his inaugural, as if its theme was also hope:
In my inaugural address to the American People, I pledged to strengthen America's oldest friendships, and to build new partnerships in pursuit of peace. I also promised that America will not seek to impose our way of life on others, but to outstretch our hands in the spirit of cooperation and trust.... Our goal is a coalition of nations who share the aim of stamping out extremism and providing our children a hopeful future that does honor to God.
3 things there that will recur throughout the speech: 1. He's not going to tell them what to do, 2. We all have children and our children are the future, and 3. He knows something of what God thinks.

Idea #1 repeats:
We are not here to lecture—we are not here to tell other people how to live, what to do, who to be, or how to worship.
Here's some more of Idea #2:
Young Muslim boys and girls should be able to grow up free from fear, safe from violence, and innocent of hatred. And young Muslim men and women should have the chance to build a new era of prosperity for themselves and their peoples....

The potential of this region has never been greater. 65 percent of its population is under the age of 30. Like all young men and women, they seek great futures to build, great national projects to join, and a place for their families to call home. But this untapped potential, this tremendous cause for optimism, is held at bay by bloodshed and terror. There can be no coexistence with this violence. There can be no tolerating it, no accepting it, no excusing it, and no ignoring it....
He's not going to tell them what to do, but that last line — "There can be no tolerating [terrorism], no accepting it, no excusing it, and no ignoring it" — is more or less telling them what they must do.
Every time a terrorist murders an innocent person, and falsely invokes the name of God, it should be an insult to every person of faith. Terrorists do not worship God, they worship death.
That's Idea #3. He takes the position of a religious authority. He makes a straightforward pronouncement that the terrorists' religion is not real religion. It's fake, he's telling his audience. He doesn't leave it to them to follow their own understanding of what religion is.
If we do not act against this organized terror, then we know what will happen. Terrorism's devastation of life will continue to spread. Peaceful societies will become engulfed by violence. And the futures of many generations will be sadly squandered.
That's Idea #2.
If we do not stand in uniform condemnation of this killing—then not only will we be judged by our people, not only will we be judged by history, but we will be judged by God.
And there's the implicit refutation of Idea #1. He is telling them what to do. And — Idea #3 — he knows what God thinks about it. Now, he's quick to merge his knowledge of God with the acceptance of all the Abrahamic religions. They stand as equals (but the terrorists are not included as authentic believers):
This is not a battle between different faiths, different sects, or different civilizations. This is a battle between barbaric criminals who seek to obliterate human life, and decent people of all religions who seek to protect it. This is a battle between Good and Evil. When we see the scenes of destruction in the wake of terror, we see no signs that those murdered were Jewish or Christian, Shia or Sunni. When we look upon the streams of innocent blood soaked into the ancient ground, we cannot see the faith or sect or tribe of the victims -- we see only that they were Children of God whose deaths are an insult to all that is holy.
That last part —  "an insult to all that is holy" — is Idea #3.
But we can only overcome this evil if the forces of good are united and strong -- and if everyone in this room does their fair share and fulfills their part of the burden....
That seems like another implicit refutation of Idea #1, but it's followed by this very strong statement of Idea #1:
America is prepared to stand with you -- in pursuit of shared interests and common security. But the nations of the Middle East cannot wait for American power to crush this enemy for them. The nations of the Middle East will have to decide what kind of future they want for themselves, for their countries, and for their children. It is a choice between two futures -- and it is a choice America CANNOT make for you.
That sets up the strongest part of the speech, which sounds as though he's yelling what to do at them:
A better future is only possible if your nations drive out the terrorists and extremists. Drive. Them. Out.
DRIVE THEM OUT of your places of worship.
DRIVE THEM OUT of your communities.
DRIVE THEM OUT of your holy land, and
DRIVE THEM OUT OF THIS EARTH.
"Drive them out" is an imperative, repeated, with brutal Trumpian emphasis, 5 times. And yet, it's technically a choice: There's that "if": "A better future is only possible if..."

Trump gives a name to his approach: "Principled Realism":
Our partnerships will advance security through stability, not through radical disruption. We will make decisions based on real-world outcomes -- not inflexible ideology. We will be guided by the lessons of experience, not the confines of rigid thinking. And, wherever possible, we will seek gradual reforms -- not sudden intervention. We must seek partners, not perfection....
So he's not telling them what to do, but inviting them to see the shared interest. It's rather mellow and forgiving, even as the 5-times-repeated DRIVE THEM OUT still echoes in the room.

He speaks next of some of the progress the various countries represented in the room have already made. But more must be done, and here he is telling them what to do (except for that "if"):
Muslim nations must be willing to take on the burden, if we are going to defeat terrorism and send its wicked ideology into oblivion. The first task in this joint effort is for your nations to deny all territory to the foot soldiers of evil. Every country in the region has an absolute duty to ensure that terrorists find no sanctuary on their soil.
If there is an "absolute duty," he's telling them what to do.
Of course, there is still much work to do.That means honestly confronting the crisis of Islamist extremism and the Islamist terror groups it inspires...
He makes a subtle change from "Islamic" to "Islamist," which seems to matter.* I think the key difference is in whether you think the terrorists have an ideology that comes from Islam or whether they falsely invoke Islam and are getting it wrong. If Trump is purporting to know that they're getting it wrong, then that's another example of Idea #3.

And here is a very clear example of Ideas ##1 and 3:
Religious leaders must make this absolutely clear: Barbarism will deliver you no glory -- piety to evil will bring you no dignity. If you choose the path of terror, your life will be empty, your life will be brief, and YOUR SOUL WILL BE CONDEMNED.
I was stunned by the direct statement of knowledge of who will go to hell. (Is it even consistent with Christianity? I thought murderers can be forgiven.)

Trump ends very clearly on Idea #1: It's up to them to make a decision:
We in this room are the leaders of our peoples. They look to us for answers, and for action. And when we look back at their faces, behind every pair of eyes is a soul that yearns for justice. Today, billions of faces are now looking at us, waiting for us to act on the great question of our time. Will we be indifferent in the presence of evil? Will we protect our citizens from its violent ideology? Will we let its venom spread through our societies? Will we let it destroy the most holy sites on earth? If we do not confront this deadly terror, we know what the future will bring—more suffering and despair. But if we act—if we leave this magnificent room unified and determined to do what it takes to destroy the terror that threatens the world—then there is no limit to the great future our citizens will have. The birthplace of civilization is waiting to begin a new renaissance. Just imagine what tomorrow could bring....
He said he'd come "to deliver a message of friendship and hope," and he did. He said he wasn't going to tell them what to do, and he never said what he's so often said to us Americans: "We have to do it, we have no choice." But he laid out the case for them, so they'd think it on their own: We have to do it, we have no choice.

________________________

* From the NYT report on the speech:
While he has criticized President Barack Obama and others for not using the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism,” his staff sought to ensure that he not use it in the speech here to this Muslim audience. The advance excerpts sent out by the White House had him instead embracing a subtle but significant switch, using the term “Islamist extremism.” Some experts say the word Islamist reflects extremists without tarring the entire religion.

But when that moment in the speech came, Mr. Trump went off script and used both words, Islamic and Islamist. “That means honestly confronting the crisis of Islamic extremism and the Islamists and Islamic terror of all kinds,” Mr. Trump said. It was unclear whether he stumbled over the different word or consciously rejected the change suggested by the text.

213 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 213 of 213
Saint Croix said...

Obama's nuclear deal was so stupid

The micromanagement is insane. Stuff like…

“Iran has removed excess centrifuges and infrastructure from the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant in line with its nuclear-related commitments,” the IAEA said in a statement.

The trust in bureaucracy, in the United Nations, the gullibility, the appeasement, the idea that Iran is a normal country, the idea that "diplomacy is working" while our fucking embassy doesn't exist in that country, the dishonesty, I could go on and on.

It's so incredibly stupid that it was a wake up call to Israel and Saudi-Arabia, respectively.

Saint Croix said...

During the campaign, Trump talked over and over and over about illegal immigration and the wall on the border of Mexico. My view, then and now, is that the real danger to the USA is a suitcase nuke being driven in a car and parked in Washington D.C. That's the reason Trump wants a wall. And why he did this deal before he started construction. Thwart Iran, contain them, get Saudi Arabia actively engaged with Isis and Islamic terrorism, and then start building the wall.

Saint Croix said...

Interesting article about Saudi Arabia vs. Isis.

Annie said...

'undiplomatic'?

He speaks plainly, is unafraid, and appears willing to defend his 'tribe' - in all ways. Patriarchal Arab culture respects that. A strong horse. Something pajama boys and feminists detest.

Clyde said...

Off-topic, but since there's no café to talk about it: Today's Google doodle is a doozy. They're honoring the 75th anniversary of the birth of Mohawk Native American activist Richard Oakes, who was one of the leaders of the occupation of Alcatraz and was "assassinated" (according to his Wikipedia page) at the age of 30. This is just the sort of guy that the Google types love: Grew up in upstate New York, got married and had a son, left them and divorced the wife and headed west to California to become an activist for Native American rights. The occupation of Alcatraz kind of fell apart after Oakes' teenage stepdaughter fell to her death on concrete steps, and he left soon after, with the Feds showing up later to scatter the rest of the protesters. Oakes' "assassination" came about when he confronted a man at a camp who according to the Wikipedia page had a "bad reputation for roughness with Native American children." The man pulled a gun and shot him, and was later acquitted of aggravated manslaughter because Oakes had been aggressive and it was ruled self-defense. We're not exactly talking "Abraham, Martin and John" territory here.

Daniel Jackson said...

What is being ignored here is the enormous symbolic power this pageant has on the social and political balance in the Middle East. Unlike North American and Europe, ALL the states (including Israel) acknowledge the force of religion in daily lives, especially as a motivator of political action.

The Saudis, as do many other states in the Middle East, do not permit Israelis (or Jews) to enter their territories, and the Saudis do not permit entry when the next port of call is Israel (see Wikipedia here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_passport), which is the next stop on Trump's pilgrimage.

His real audience was Israel and Jordan. His reference to exporting terrorism and not acknowledging as such is a direct slap on the face to the so-called king of Jordan who last week demanded justice against Israel when one of his citizens, a "tourist", repeatedly stabbed an Israeli soldier in the name of God.

In this part of the world, symbolic gestures are not to be taken lightly. Trump dancing with swords with Saudi nobility, his anointing with a royal medal, his invoking the Name (albeit in English), his beautiful wife uncovered by modestly coiffed, and his Jewish daughter and her Jewish husband receiving a donation to their causes of mercy and elevation of women--all these are more than empty gestures. If through all of this The Donald behaved regally, then this, too, was noticed by all. This was not done by the O'man whose submissive bow to the Saudis was seen as offensive of the highest order.

It is no small gesture that the Saudis donate a chunk of change to the public charity cause of a Jewish woman. Nor is a simple fashion statement that this Orthodox does not cover her hair, which is a cultural practice among religious women in all Middle Eastern states, including Israel.

It is not just the Saudis who have been exploiting terrorism; the PA and Hamas practically invented the suicide bomber in the mid nineties and continue to give convicted terrorists a salary while they languish in Israeli jails. THEY were intended audience. It is with group of liberators The Donald will speak today arriving in Jerusalem to celebrate the fiftieth jubilee of the return of Ha Kotel.

As for invoking the Name (albeit in English), Protestant theologians have long referred to this as The Prophetic Voice. There is nothing outrageous about this in a Jewish sense as well. An old rebbe of mine told me that God speaks to us all the time; but we have to LISTEN. This is why, he added, that the most important Jewish prayer starts with the word SHEMAI, to hear or listen.

The medium is the message.

David Baker said...

"his beautiful wife uncovered by modestly coiffed..."

"Modestly" is an understatement. Melania's hair was like a burka, a veil, and a scarf all combed into one.

Pretty amazing, too.

Daniel Jackson said...

Well, it appears I was in error. Mrs Kushner is wearing a very stylish head covering as she accompanies her husband and her father through the streets of the Old City of Jerusalem. Mrs Trump is not.

Interesting.

mockturtle said...

Daniel, it only makes sense. Ivanka is an Orthodox Jew. Melania is not.

Daniel Jackson said...

Mockturtle, you are correct; however, I might say she is of the Modern Orthodox nusach and normally does not cover her hair.

The choice of hat she is sporting is in itself another symbolic gesture since it is in the Kate Middleton style clearly for a formal state function as a member of the entourage of The Donald.

Peter said...

"We all have children and our children are the future"

But Japan and most of Europe have birthrates well below replacemetn level. Is Trump saying Europe and Japan have no future?

The childless are led by childless leaders: Angela Merkel, Mark Rutte, Emmanuel Macron. Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Löfven, Luxembourg's Prime Minister Xavier Bettel and Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon. What do they have in common? They're all childless.

No children, no future?

Saint Croix said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
mockturtle said...

No children, no future?

Nope, no future. The much-higher-birth-rate immigrant population holds the future.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 213 of 213   Newer› Newest»