MOSCOW CONSIDERS THE PRESIDENT'S CAIRO SPEECH SIGNIFICANT,

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 MOSCOW 001582

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREL IS RS XF
SUBJECT: MOSCOW CONSIDERS THE PRESIDENT'S CAIRO SPEECH SIGNIFICANT,
BUT NOT REVOLUTIONARY


1. Summary: The President's June 4 Cairo speech received a
generally positive response in the Moscow press. Russia's Muslim
leaders were similarly upbeat, and they expressed hope for better
relations between West and East and an inclusive global
conversation. Many commentators questioned whether the speech will
truly lead to a new era in U.S. relations with the Muslim world, and
some argued that just one speech cannot overcome the serious rift
that has developed. Georgiy Mirskiy, a Middle East expert at the
World Economy and International Relations Institute, warned that the
President's pressure on Tel Aviv could have a detrimental effect on
the future of the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks. Pro-Kremlin
daily Izvestiya noted similarities between the President's speech
and comments made over the years by Putin, implying that Washington
had followed Moscow's lead on Middle East policy. End summary.

--------------
Russia's Muslims Generally Upbeat
--------------

2. Russia's Muslim leaders were generally upbeat on the content of
the President's June 4 speech at Cairo University. Rushan Abbyasov,
head of the International Department of the Union of Muftis of
Russia, said the speech could become an impulse for new relations
between West and East. Abbyasov noted that this was particularly
important for Russians, who have always been a bridge between these
two civilizations. Looking forward to the President's upcoming
visit to Russia, Gulnur Gaziyev, a professor at the Moscow Islamic
University and the primary editor of the site www.muslims.ru, said
it is important to understand what the new Administration's foreign
policy will be, and that in the midst of the global crisis, "into
the old single polar world must enter a new philosophy, which does
not ignore the views of single countries or ethnic or religious
groups."

--------------
Significant, But Not Revolutionary
--------------


3. The President's speech received a generally positive reception
within the Russian media and among commentators who deemed the
speech historic, although they asked if it would be enough to
overcome hostility toward the U.S. within the Muslim world. The
Russian press also used the speech as an opportunity to discuss the
President's willingness to pursue diplomacy abroad, even with
"unfriendly" countries, which several media outlets described as a
departure from the Bush Administration's approach to diplomacy.


4. The President's speech competed for media attention with the
International Economic Forum in St. Petersburg, which dominated
television. Channel 1 and NTV, two of the national TV networks,
reported on the speech, as did all major newspapers.

--------------
Questioning the Speech's Effectiveness
--------------


5. Several media outlets lauded the speech as important, but were
skeptical that the President's words were enough for a new beginning
in the U.S. relationship with the Muslim world. Rossiya, a
government-owned television station that broadcasts nationally,
argued that the rift in the relationship was too wide to improve
relations anytime soon, while Rossiyskaya Gazeta, a government-owned
newspaper, commented, "[It] may go down in history as the day when
Obama knocked on the door of the Arab world closed to his
predecessors. But surely, one speech is not enough...."


6. Pointing to U.S. actions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan,
Yevgeniy Satanovskiy, President of the Institute of Middle Eastern
Studies, argued in Komsomolskaya Pravda that when the President said
the U.S. wants to improve relations with Muslims, "Washington's
words conflict with its deeds." He also noted the difficulty
inherent in the President's expression of support for the
Palestinian people when the U.S. maintained a strategic relationship
with Israel.


7. Several reports discussed the potential impact of the
President's speech on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and covered
the responses from pro-Israel groups. Georgiy Mirskiy, a Middle
East expert at the World Economy and International Relations
Institute, commented in Vremya Novostei, a centrist, politically
focused newspaper, that the President must understand that
Netanyahu's return to power has not helped the chances for resuming
peace talks, and cautioned that pressing Tel Aviv too hard to make
concessions could "ruin all hopes for resuming the peace talks."
--------------
What about Russia?
--------------


8. Dmitri Babich, writing for RIA Novosti, thought that the
President did not deviate from the "guidelines of U.S. policy in the

MOSCOW 00001582 002 OF 002


Middle East and Afghanistan," but did demonstrate his ability as a
"salesman of unsalable stock." Citing the President's need for the
support of Arabs and Israelis, as well as Americans, Babich said
that the President must demonstrate progress in the peace process
soon. Russia, he argued, is crucial to resolving conflicts in the
Middle East, and he speculated that the President's next speech to
the Muslim world would specifically mention Russia's role.


9. Izvestiya, a pro-Kremlin daily, thought the President's comments
on Afghanistan, Iran, and Iraq sounded almost identical to
statements made by Putin and other Russian officials over the last
decade. Referring to the speech's contents, Izvestiya wrote, "What
has become a revelation for the West has already been proposed by
Moscow a long time ago."
BEYRLE