As President Barack Obama took the stage in Cairo, Egypt, on Thursday, millions of people tuned in to watch him give his highly anticipated speech to the Muslim world.
Obama's speech to the Muslim people was certainly not groundbreaking in its content, but the tone was different from that of our previous administration. Gone, it seems, are the days of either being with us or with the evildoers. Instead of chastising, Obama spoke with a sense of respect and understanding toward the people who haven't been heard in years.
From greeting his audience in Arabic and quoting the Quran to using carefully chosen words that would translate well, Obama maintained a middle ground, which was extremely important given his situation and audience.
Many have criticized the speech, saying that it wasn't a harsh enough stance against the leaders of Muslim nations - but they've missed the point entirely. The speech was not aimed at heads of state, but at a younger generation of Muslim people, which is where the ties between America and the Muslim world lie. By speaking to these future leaders, this new rhetoric will hopefully dissuade potential Islamic militants from choosing to go down the path of extremism.
In about 55 minutes, the president managed to take the case away from extremists that aggression is the only choice.
Even before Obama started his trip to the Middle East, al-Qaeda's head honcho himself, Osama bin Laden, felt compelled to release an audio statement condemning the American president. It seems that the bearded hide-and-seek champion of the world is worried about the message Obama carries with him - that the West is not at war with Muslims and that violence isn't going to solve anything.
And although his speech in Cairo won't change things immediately, it is important that Obama said what he did, putting to words what many have thought but dared not speak - bringing up taboos including women's rights and religious freedom.
Critics have blasted Obama for not painting the full picture of the Middle East and not talking enough about Iran's nuclear program or the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. People have talked for years and years and not been able to expand on all of the problems, so why did so many seem to expect him to singlehandedly spell out each and every thing wrong with the region?
It's been almost painful to watch his critics grasping at straws trying to find fault in what was undeniably an important speech.
Interestingly enough, most of this criticism is coming from pundits back home, while the majority of critics in the Middle East express reactions ranging from skepticism to hope. In a region where talking hasn't done much in the past, it's hard to see what sort of change could come of it, but perhaps people want to believe things are going to get better at this point. Only time will tell if these strong words will be followed by actions.
In the end, no shoes came flying toward the stage, so even if nothing else comes of the speech, at least we can say that in itself is an accomplishment.
Naudia Jawad is a journalism graduate student.
