By granting his first interview to Alarabiya –the pan-Arab underdog– instead of Aljazeera, Mr. Obama is already signaling that he is taking sides in the Arab world’s divide.
While reading the coverage of Mr. Obama’s interview with Alarabiya on American news websites and blogs, I’ve noticed that an important angle of the story was missing. People either extolled Mr. Obama’s “brave” and “audacious” overture or criticized his supposed naiveté and implied that by granting an Arab station an interview, he was somehow selling out Americans.
Missing in all that coverage (and apologies to those I might have missed) was a small detail that has the potential to add texture and subtlety to an otherwise straightforward story.
You see, Al-Arabiya is not Aljazeera. In fact it is the anti-Aljazeera. In that proverbial divide between moderate and fanatic Arabs, “moderates” (those who are more interested in shopping and trading than killing Americans and Jews) generally prefer Al-Arabiya’s milder narratives and its overall friendliness to the west. Hisham Melhem, the Lebanese anchor who conducted the interview is a supporter of the “Cedar revolution”, the pro-western movement that sacked the Syrians from Lebanon 3 years ago. Moreover, Alarabiya is funded by the Saudi King who is leading the so-called moderate front in a cold war pitting realists against hardliners who are lead by Iran.
Alarabiya is the Arab MSNBC to Aljazeera’s FOX News, and President Obama’s granting Alarabiya his first interview instead of the slightly more watched Aljazeera is the media equivalent of him calling Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and shunning Hamas’ leader Ismail Hanié.
In short: While President Obama’s interview looks on its surface like an “opening up” to the Arab world, with all the due emphasis on mutual respect and change of course, it is also a pointed snub and a shrewd maneuver in the heart of the war of ideas taking place in the Arab world.
Hello, my name is Mustapha and I have been blogging about Lebanese society and politics since February 2005. You can also find me on 
that not necessarily a fair assesment.
you could say the same thing about any arab channel he would have decided to do this interview with.
most if not all arab channels are biased anyway, or belong to a certain group or party.
so in retrospect, giving the interview to a “moderate” tv channel is better than an “extremist” one.
its not fair either to criticise the affiliation of the journalist or reporter as long as he asked fair questions and straightforward questions and did not give obama a free pass.
Excellent post Mustapha. Good to see you back! Hopefully you’ll keep it up.
Sorry babagannouj,
Your reply is not on point, contrary to Mustapha’s article. It is for the reasons that you pointed out (the fact that most arab tv stations are biased) that the choice of one over the other matters all that much more and to interview with Hisham Melhem (ouch, al-jazeera announcers who love to scream and shout are turning in their grave!).
Great post Mustapha, very nice angle on the story.
Ummm…”slightly” more watched al-Jazeera? Try massively.
I am sorry to say this but this post simply annoyed me. While it sounds exactly like what the US/Western readers would love to read from an arab; it is simply loaded with stereotypes that are so wrong and so deterimental to any real conflict resolution.
your simplistiic view dividing people to ‘those who like to trade and shop rather than kill Americans and Jews” sounds exactly like a statement Bush would make. i.e. an oversimplification of a more complex situation, that led to the current situation we are in.
Sorry Anonymous,
Do not agree that it is an oversimplification. Taking the current Arab Israeli debate back to its origin, while very appealing to the Arab masses is not pragmatic nor practical nor realistic nor is it a fruitful exercise. In fact, if you insist on this line of argumentation the only solution would be the destruction of the state of Israel and the reoccupation of Palestine by the Brits. We all know however that history is a one way street.
To go back to the “original sin” is to deny the possibility of any future solution. Your statements are to the exact opposite of your point: your statement indicates that the fundamental difference is between people who have accepted history and those who deny history its course; your statement reflects the fact that you believe in the original sin of Israel. This more “complex situation” you refer to is not so complex, what will both parties live with in order to get peace in the area? To compare Mustapha to Bush and to through all of the “US/Western readers” in one pot,,, humm,,, some over simplification on your part, do you not think?
“You see, Al-Arabiya is not Aljazeera. In fact it is the anti-Aljazeera. In that proverbial divide between moderate and fanatic Arabs, “moderates” (those who are more interested in shopping and trading than killing Americans and Jews) generally prefer Al-Arabiya’s milder narratives and its overall friendliness to the west.”
There is enough willful ignorance and delusion in this paragraph for a voluminous treatise on the politically retarded.
You always seemed smarter when you did not say anything. Please do yourself and us a favor and go back to not posting.
I definitely prefer Arabiya, because I see as straight enough, while Jazeera is playing the role of “soumoud and tasaddi” and at the same time Qatar is known to be the closest Arab country to Israel and the US.
I actually agree with babagannouj (cool nick btw)..
I wouldn’t read too much into the fact that he was interviewed by al-Arabiya, and I wouldn’t say it was al-Arabiya OVER al-Jazeera. It might just be the Hisham Melhem is very well connected (which he is) in Washington and managed to secure 17 minutes of the President’s time… After all, it’s not like it was a full blast 1-2 hour interview with in depth analysis of the Middle East situation and a confrontation/challenging of US opinions…
Good day to all…
I neither see al arabiya or al jazeera :)
good to see you back Moustafa :)
I think that most people in the arab world are too well acquainted with the US position that they’d rather see action as opposed to words or so called changes of heart. Fact is, the US is tilted in its approach towards Israel, and any “rapprochement” with the arabs, needs to be followed by a real commitment to action rather than promises…The majority of arabs are not going to buy this stuff, especially in the aftermath of the Gaza massacre.
With all this talk of reconciliation of Palestinian/Israeli conflict, I’m not sure how one convinces Hamas to abandon a pre-1948 view and accept a 1967-border “moderate” solution. Accepting such would mean an end to what Hamas stand for.
Beautiful insight mustapha!
Is it possible though, that Al-Jazeera didn’t even try?
You know, Aljazeera (English) isn’t all that bad. Very careful reading of its articles can be quite rewarding.
Babaghannouj,
Thanks for your comment. I have been watching Mr. Obama throughout his campaign, and one thing I have noticed is a strong emphasis on symbolism and stagecraft. I would say with a fair amount of confidence that Alarabiya was a purposeful choice.
BJ,
Thanks man, I’m afraid though that my postings will remain sparse for the time being..
Samalibnan,
Thanks for your spiritual defense :)
Jamal,
Perhaps, but according to web trends, Alarabiya.net is closing the gap on aljazeera.net, despite the fact that both Aljazeera’s english and Arabic services use the same web address
Anon,
Thanks for your feedback. I guess we can only agree to disagree
Cedar,
I’ve met a lot of people who migrated to Alarabiya because they found Aljazeera a tad too intense for their taste..
Tarek,
(Watch my comment to babaghannouj)
Frenchy,
Thanks man!
VOR:
I think Obama specifically mentioned in that interview that he wants to be judged by his actions, not by his words. Perhaps because he’s in tune with the cynicism you’re mentioning.
Snurldy,
That would be Mr. Obama’s Challenge
_Z
Thanks man. Aljazeera would have definitely tried to deprive its main competitor from such a scoop.
Solomon,
Aljazeera English is actually a bit different than its Arabic sister. You’re right, it’s rather well informative (I’d compare it to Jim Lehrer’s Newshour)
Google trends? Perhaps, but websites != tv.
No comment on the assumption though that “those who are more interested in shopping and trading than killing Americans and Jews” only view al-arabiya. Blogging it doesn’t make it true.
If both Aljazeera and that audience are as club-footed as some seem to claim, then a first interview with President Obama at a Middle Eastern TV outlet other than Aljazeera should not be surprising. With regard to Alarabiya, it is far easier to enter a room through an open doorway than to hunt for a key to unlock a door. I suspect the Obama administration took the shortest path available. Unless Aljazeera quickly proposed and was also denied an interview with Obama, the failure to invite and be first in line to interview belongs to Aljazeera.
Media tends to lean one direction or the other, with criticism omnipresent either way. But in a related observation, what would you think if Obama had been waving his right hand with his finger pointed at you, the viewer? That is exactly how one frequently observes many Middle Eastern representatives on TV screens and in videos. A right arm raised with an index finger pointed nearly continuously—the preacher to his choir, that always works—but in politics the very same is the well-known body language of dictators, as history recalls—in farce, in force, and sometimes both. Just press mute on your remote and watch.
mustafa, this is so ironic.. in the adds by google, what i get to see is:
Support Israeli Soldiers
Support IDF Soldiers! You Too Can Strengthen Israel’s Defense.
hehehe this is so ironic
umm….did you really just compare al-jazeera to FOX news? unbelievable.
While I understand what you are trying to say I find this statement “Alarabiya is the Arab MSNBC to Aljazeera’s FOX News” very funny and very wrong.
If FOX News is extreme than MSNBC is exactly the same just at another end of the spectrum.
“I wouldn’t read too much into the fact that he was interviewed by al-Arabiya, and I wouldn’t say it was al-Arabiya OVER al-Jazeera. It might just be the Hisham Melhem is very well connected (which he is) in Washington and managed to secure 17 minutes of the President’s time…”
Not to mention the fact that Israelis were consulted no doubt. Who do you think they will suggest.
Mustapha, comparing AlJazeera to America’s Fox News Channel is correct. Yet, given the presence large media outlet in America, it is scary that Fox has more audience than it is closest rival, like CNN by big margins. Anyways, media everywhere is biased one way or another. In America media is completely at the hands of Jews, even Fox. Murdoch is an Australian Jews who own the Fox news Channel. Of course CNN is owned and operated by Jews. Washington Post is owned and run by Jews. In America to criticize Israel is blasphemy. To criticize Muslims is quite patriotic. This is the state of reality in America. So, as world citizen with conscience and sense of moral responsibility, it is a duty to be surgical when reading news or any other material. American media is excellent, but it loses it shine on the subject of Israeli-Arab conflict. The way Israel and Arabs are treated in American media is quite criminal. Of course, you have to pay close attention to understand the media or else they are very subtle and convincing.
Here is Melhem’s account:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/27/obama-al-arabiya-intervie_n_161451.
Borderman: Media is produced by every kind of creed and race in the United States. Do you suppose that Muslims and their governments do not dominate the media in the Middle East? “Surgical” removal of propaganda in many Middle Eastern venues would leave the reader or viewer with little or nothing.
personally I don’t think he should’ve done the interview with either one. Tell me did it set anyone’s mind at ease? Did the Arab world breath a collective sigh of relief in regards to U.S policy in the region? I doubt it! Don’t drink the Obama kool-aid just yet. hes been in office less than a month and all the good will interviews don’t amount to much. Barack Obama is a wordsmith who’s pleasant demeanor sounds good but actions are the only things that count in the big picture.
you arab are so naive and stupid I am as an arab living in michigan I feel sorry for you.
I quote you here “Mr. Obama is already signaling that he is taking sides in the Arab world’s divide”.
Obama does’nt give a rat ass about this chanel or that one, the American admin. wants to create a divide in the arab world, this is actually the most important mission in the last admin agenda (richard Perl) google him, my friend.
And they are using the czar of Egypt (he get paid $3B/year for his obedience) and the goliath of Saudi to do so. Arabs will always be stupid, it is very sad.
“Alarabiya is the Arab MSNBC to Aljazeera’s FOX News”: This is so far the most stupid thing I ‘ve read from you safi..by far ZZZ mostttttttt stupid..
aby: “…the American admin. wants to create a divide in the arab world…”
That is laughable. Middle Eastern media claims are reflections of their own cultural divisions.
http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=ia&ID=IA42808
“Alalam” is the best news channell to watch.
Iranian guy
Hello Mustapha,
My name is Ryan and I am a first year college student attending the University of Vermont in Vermont, USA. I am participating in a blogging assignment for a “Gender in the Middle East” class in the study of anthropology. I became very interested in your blogging website because I am a first generation Lebanese American. My father’s family is from Beirut and, actually, I have a number of uncles who attended the American University of Beirut. Being Lebanese I chose to do the majority of my assignments on social and political issues in Lebanon.
A few questions I would like to pose to you, Mustapha. I was in fact wondering if Obama’s decision to interview with Alarabiya instead of Aljazeera noticeably affected people’s views of the new American president? Would it be safe to say that by taking this interview with Alarabiya it shows that he is for the movement of westernization in the Middle East in a peaceful fashion rather than one who battles to impress western views onto the nations of the Middle East? Lastly, how would you say this affects, if at all, political leader’s thoughts about President Obama?
Thank you for your time Mustapha, I hope to hear back from you sometime. Feel free to email if you would like.
sorry Ryan, just saw your questions (5 days late).
If you’re still interested in answers, please email me to mustapha@beirutspring.com
“Alarabiya is funded by the Saudi King who is leading the so-called moderate front in a cold war pitting realists against hardliners who are lead by Iran”
Really? So now Saudi Arabia is a ‘moderate’ country? Tell me, oh wise one, how is Saudi Arabia any different than Iran in your own moderate – radical scope (if anything, it’s worse)? Saudi doesn’t hang, behead, stone people for consumption of alcohol, sex before marriage, homosexuality etc? Saudi, unlike Iran ofcourse, has an elected parliament, head of state etc and is ofcourse not a dictatorial king/sheikh-dom whose power has existed since the country’s birth, right? Like everyone knows, unlike Iran, Saudi ofocourse does not tolerate extremism, anti-semitism and by no means is the source of all wahhabi and salafist extremism. You guys need to wake up from your little fantasy dreams to see the truth as it is, not as you make it out and paint it to suit your arguments. These people have interests, if democracy is against these interests they will willfully deny that nation of its democracy or sovereignty. America has overthrown more democracies than any other faction or nation, and has been successful in setting up only it’s own democracy. If Iran, Syria and Hezbollah are so dark and tainted, then go live in backward Saudi, or maybe you prefer the police state of mubarak? Live in segregation and fear and sexism and racism for a few years and see how you like it. Iran prior to the Iranian revolution has boosted its mortality rates due to its programs to combat rising child births – supported by all scholars there – from 6 kids per family to 2, and vaccination rates stand at 100% through free medical care. Syria is the only secular Arab country in the middle-east with a functioning social program providing citizens with free health, education, welfare and job creation. Hezbollah has filled the gap the Lebanese government has created when dealing with its citizens, from reconstruction, welfare, educaion, healthcare etc. If anything, it’s the wests sanctions and stubborn ways which have darkened the lives of the middle east, not these people. You see, in every era of hostility, it’s usually the people who are well-off who whine and moan whenever someone retaliates to an attack. The argument, as it goes, is if we don’t retaliate then maybe they won’t bother us anymore – just leave them do what they want without consequences, at least it will be less than what they would do if we do retaliate. Do you immediately see the fault in that? It looks rational, but not logical. You can bet, hardly any of you have experienced occupation and are quick to judge who darkens and who ‘colours’ lives. Go ask the residents of south lebanon, has Israel’s withdrawal from the area darkened or brightened up their lives? We’ve already asked Gaza – it’s no coincidence that the only year any faction other than the PLO wins the elections comes after Israel disengaged from Gaza unilaterally without any preconditions. It was Hamas that forced the withdrawal not Fatah negotiations. The people voted Hamas. The same group who forced Israel, for the second time in its existence, to give up land to Arabs without preconditions – the first was in south lebanon 2000. How oh how were young youths fighting to be free of occupation SERVE other governments? That’s what I fail to know. If anything, Iran has benefited Hezbollah more than Hezbollah has benefited Iran. Indeed, the effects of Hezbollah on Israel in case of a israel-iran conflict are so miniature they would hardly make a difference (a war between iran and israel would be a missile war, not a land war). The most hezbollah has done for Iran would probably be intelligence sharing and hezbollah commandos training iranians – because usually common sense dictates that the army with more practical experience in any conflict confined to a specific region – in this case hezbollah in south lebanon/northern ‘israel’ – would train the less experienced – i.e. the iranian in iran who has no idea how israelis fight, their tactics, has not adopted to the geography etc etc etc. Hezbollah, if they have the evil intentions everyone thinks they have, would overthrow the government in the blink of an eye, but they don’t and won’t. The only time Hezbollah has militarily done anything against the ruling coalition is when their military systems were to be infringed upon – despite repetitive warnings that any such acts will be met with ARMED RESISTANCE. Call it what you want, but if someone tried taking my boxing gloves in the middle of a fight they are conspiring against me, at the benefit of my opponent. Simple as.
have a good day sry for long post.
Mustapha,
My name is Dan and I am a student at The University of Vermont. I am currently in an Anthropology class learning about the Middle East. Our class has devoted some time focusing on the Middle East and its relationships with the United States and elsewhere so I thought your post was particularly relevant to what we have discussed. I agree with your point that President Obama’s choice to give his first Interview to Al-Arabiya opposed to Al-Jazeera can be looked upon as “pointed snub and a shrewd maneuver” towards the Arab community and I wanted to ask if you or others in the Middle East still share that opinion about Obama’s Al-Arabiya interview? When it became national news here in the US I held a similar opinion as you do in your post, that the interview is going to outrage many in the Middle East and be looked at as non-productive propaganda by the West sugarcoating its policies and image. Was there more of a surge of Anti-Americanism throughout Lebanon and the rest of the Middle East because of it? How has our president been received in your region since making the interview? In your opinion could there have been other ways to more realistically handle US/Middle Eastern Relations?
Good plat! Add to favorite
you mean you can not tell what news chanel is a propaganda machine? do you even know the history of al-ararbiya or are you just playing dumb? just because you have your own narrow minded and child-like immature personal agenda does not mean the rest can’t see through it. you’re one deluded man.