User:Viriditas/A New Beginning

Problem

A "legacy" section was created in A New Beginning, an article about a speech Barack Obama delivered on June 4, 2009 at at Cairo University. Upon further examination, the legacy section appears to be a coatrack which was created in order to specifically criticize the Middle Eastern foreign policy of the Barack Obama administration and the foreign policy of the Barack Obama administration in general.

Arguments for removal

Removal of the legacy section is justified for the following reasons:

1. The section contains copyvio, plagiarism, misattribution of sources and misuse of primary sources. Such content should be removed whenever identified.
2. Primary and secondary sources, including transcripts, news reports, editorials and opinion pieces, have been synthesized to promote the idea that the foreign policy of the Barack Obama is a "failure". Original research and/or misuse of sources should be removed whenever identified.
3. Opinion pieces criticizing the foreign policy of the Barack Obama administration aren't representative of a "legacy", nor do they discuss the subject of this article. "Coatrack" sections should be removed.
4. The speech was given in 2009. There hasn't been enough time for reliable sources to publish information on its "legacy".

Arguments for inclusion

Reinstatement of some of the content is possible for the following reasons:

1. Relevant information in the first paragraph could be merged into the background section of the current article provided it is supported by secondary sources
2. Subsequent speeches, such as the speech at the University of Indonesia, might be relevant to the subject in another context, perhaps in another section, if reliable sources connect the two
3. An assessment of Obama's speech, such as the one offered by Gregg Carlstrom of Al Jazeera, might be relevant if additional reliable sources can be found to support it. However, it must be used carefully and cannot be inserted wholesale as in the current case of copyvio
4. If it can be shown that the 2011 State Department speech is relevant, then it should be noted
5. If survey results, such as those from the Pew Research Center, are relevant to this subject, and are directly connected by the sources, then they should be included

Note

• Unsourced material is colored yellow.
• Request for secondary sources are colored light blue.
• Questionable sources are colored light green.
• Questionable content is colored light grey.
• Copyvio/plagiarism is colored orange

Legacy

Anything relevant in this paragraph belongs in the background section,
not in legacy. Picking and choosing primary sources
without the guidance of secondary sources is not acceptable.
Historically, it may be too soon to discuss any kind of "legacy",
or to find a single source that discusses it.

In his inaugural address President Obama reached out to the Muslim World by saying that he seeks "a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect." He also said he would be willing to "extend a hand" to those "who cling to power through corruption and deceit" if they "are willing to unclench" their fists. Obama attempted to reach out to Arab leaders by granting his first interview to an Arab cable TV network, Al Arabiya. On March 19, 2009, Obama continued his outreach to the Muslim world, releasing a New Year's video message to the people and government of Iran. This attempt at outreach was rebuffed by the Iranian leadership. President Obama's first trip to a Muslim majority country occurred on April 6–7, 2009 when he visited Turkey and spoke to the Grand National Assembly. The speech was was well received by many Arab governments.

The follow-up speech in Jakarta is not part of any legacy.
It was part of his tour of four countries in Asia, where he
gave a speech at the University of Indonesia. The sources
make passing reference to Cairo but say little to nothing
about it. Much of the text is copied wholesale from NYT

On November 10, 2010 Obama delivered a speech at the University of Indonesia in Jakarta, Indonesia. The speech focused on development, democracy and religion. Muslim leaders in Indonesia praised Obama’s knowledgeable and warm approach to Indonesia but expressed doubts that his speech would resonate in the wider Muslim world. Too few concrete changes in American foreign policy, they said, had followed previous speeches in Egypt and Turkey. As part of this speech Al Jazeera assessed how well Obama has fulfilled the promises of his Cairo speech. They said that Obama was successful in these things:

Is Gregg Carlstrom's scorecard for Al Jazeera notable?
Have other sources referred to it,
or have other sources published similar critiques?
Only one of the nine points appears to be objectively quantifiable
(Close the Guantanamo Bay prison by early 2010).
Have other sources noted the failure
of closing Guantanamo Bay in relation to this speech?
The text says "they concluded", but it is the opinion
of Gregg Carlstrom, not Al Jazeera.
The list is copied wholesale from Carlstrom

• Remove troops from Iraqi cities, and keep withdrawal timeline
• Invest $1.5bn per year, for five years, in Pakistan
• Expanded exchange programmes with schools in Muslim countries
• Host an "entrepreneurship summit" to encourage businesses in Muslim countries
• Funds to support science and technology in the Muslim world

But Obama failed to fulfill the following promises during his Cairo Speech:

• Close the Guantanamo Bay prison by early 2010
• "The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements"
• Democracy promotion: "We will support [it] everywhere"
• A "new way forward" with Iran

They concluded: ”He has come through with many of his concrete "deliverables," like expanded educational exchanges and a fund to encourage science and technology. But his administration has failed to deliver on the more fundamental issues of reorientating US policy.”

2011 State Department speech relies on primary source transcripts
Which secondary sources mention it in relation to this topic?
Discussion of UN Resolution 242, rejection by Netanyahu, not on topic
Source doesn't say Obama first to endorse UN position. Much of this section
is devoted to the IP conflict and the sources say nothing about the Cairo speech.
This is a synthesis of post-speech incidents related to the IP conflict.

On May 19, 2011, Obama made his third major outreach to the Muslim World in a major Middle-East speech at the US-State Department to lay out his vision of the promises and challenges of the upheaval in the Arab world. In this speech he stated "The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states". This position is consistent with UN Resolution 242, but Obama is the first president to effectively endorse this unanimous UN position, giving it added weight at a particularly important point in Middle East relations. Obama sentence on the 1967 lines as part of his outreach to the Muslim World, in the context of the Middle East peace process particular to Palestinians, has generated controversy and was rejected by the Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. Obama clarified his position on the 1967 Lines on May 22, 2011 on the annual policy conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). President Obama's speech to AIPAC was appreciated by Netanyahu. Netanyahu also stated that he is "determined to work together" with the president to advance peace, while Palestinian reactions to US President Barack Obama’s State Department and AIPAC speeches indicate that the president’s goal of encouraging another attempt at Israeli-Palestinian reconciliation has a very slim prospect of success. On May 24, 2011, in a response to Obama’s Middle East Speech, Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu has told the US Congress Israel would be generous with the size of a future Palestinian state but that the border could not rest at pre-1967 lines.

Opinion pieces not reliable for statements of fact. Criticism and praise
of Obama's speech is already handled in the relevant reaction section.
Opinion piece by Mark Silverberg of the Hudson Institute and opinion
piece in the NYT is focused on the IP conflict, not this topic. Opinion
piece by Jonathan S. Tobin and Kirkpatrick NYT article don't actually
criticize the speech as the text appears, but criticize the inaction of
the administration to embrace the initial Arab Spring protests. The opinion
piece by Ross Douthat is about Obama's foreign policy. In combination,
these weak sources (opinion pieces) are used inappropriately to push a POV
that has little to nothing to do with the subject of this speech ("A New Beginning"),
and everything to do with criticizing Obama's overall foreign policy with the
Muslim world. In other words, this is a WP:COATRACK.

Prior to Obama Middle East speech at the State Department there was criticism on Obama‘s outreach to the Muslim world: “His outreach policy cannot pacify Islamic expansionists any more than Chamberlain could appease Nazi expansionist ambitions. If and when American officials finally understand this, the failure of Obama's outreach to the Muslim world will have at least provided him with a dose of reality.” After the speech the criticism continued. While there was praise for Obama, the reactions inside the USA and the Arab World were critical. Some argued that Obama “finds himself aping his predecessor’s freedom-and-democracy rhetoric — and then living (as Bush did, post-Iraq, and as every president eventually does) with the gap between that soaring rhetoric and certain more uncomfortable realities.”, others stated that he “did manage to alienate and weaken Israel but he will get little or no credit for this from Arab governments or public opinion. […] Once again he succeeded in alienating friends while failing to impress those who are skeptical about the United States.”. And in the Arab World the people say that “his soaring words and financial pledges did little to undo their disappointment at his apparent equivocation during the early days of the Arab revolt.”

Copyvio from Pew Research Center. No such thing as "Pet Global Attitudes Project".
Use of a survey requires secondary source
Not a "Washington Post editorial" but an editorial from The Washington Times.
Content has nothing to do with the speech, entirely synthesis to advance the position
that the Middle Eastern foreign policy of the Barack Obama administration was a failure.

The rise of pro-democracy movements during 2010–2011 Middle East and North Africa protests has not led to an improvement in America’s image in the region. Instead, in key Arab nations and in other predominantly Muslim countries, views of the U.S. remain negative, as they have been for nearly a decade. The Pet Global Attitudes Project says: “U.S. President Barack Obama […] receives low marks in largely Muslim countries. With the exception of Indonesia, majorities in the countries surveyed lack confidence in Obama to do the right thing in world affairs. And for the most part, Obama’s handling of issues in the Muslim world, including the recent uprisings in the Middle East, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Iran and Afghanistan, are met with disapproval.” Based on these results the Washington Post released on May 18, 2011 an Editorial which said that President Obama’s “much-heralded outreach to the Muslim world has failed.”