After the Bush era, any American president would have been expected to feel the need to go out of his way to assuage Muslim feelings, even though Obama, with his personal history, is exceptionally well equipped to perform the role as unifier of civilizations. His vision stands in enlightened contrast to the way conservatives in the West - in the fashion of Samuel Huntington - has perceived the Western-Islamic encounter. Indeed, what is almost revolutionary about Obama's vision is that it reintroduces a perspective inspired by Enlightenment thinking in the Western discourse about Islam. That tradition of thought had in fact been discarded, not only by conservatives in the West, but by "enlightened" liberals as well. As prominent American liberal intellectual Mark Lilla typically wrote, "we have little reason to expect societies in the grip of a powerful tradition of political theology (Islam) to follow our unusual path".

Appearances are partly deceptive. Although the Bush administration succeeded in creating and maintaining the perception that the United States was engaged in a crusade against Islam, it did in fact champion "moderate Islam", notably its Turkish variant, as a model to follow for the Islamic world. In the event, the U.S. came to be seen as having joined hands with Islamic conservatism against secularism in Turkey. What is promising with the approach of Obama is his abandonment of any references to "moderate Islam". What made the message that Obama delivered to the Muslim world from Turkey groundbreaking was not the professions of respect for Islam. It is the fact that the president seems intent on rehabilitating the notion of secularism.

Addressing the Turkish parliament - with its Islamic conservative majority - Obama spoke about "secular democracy" as "the greatest monument to Atatürk's life." Obama's tributes to the secularist revolutionary were no bows dictated by diplomatic etiquette to the founding father of a host country, but politically charged interventions in the ongoing debate about secularism and Islam. Indeed, his words were near-affronts to the belief held by Islamic conservatives and liberals, the alliance that dominates Turkish public discourse, that the introduction of the secularist reforms was a traumatic event. Symptomatically, leading Turkish liberal columnist Ahmet Altan recently wrote that "had it not been for Atatürk, we would not have had any problems at all over the issue of religion". The belief that secularism has created an existential void in Turkey is a theme that runs through the writings of Turkey's most prominent liberal, Nobel laureate Orhan Pamuk.

Obama's rehabilitation of Atatürk failed to impress Turkish liberals and Islamic conservatives. Radical Islamists plotting in Pakistan and elsewhere on the other hand, are sure to have found it profoundly provocative. A decade ago Usama bin Laden planned an attack on the Ataturk mausoleum in Ankara; in his first video message after 9/11, bin Laden, in a reference to Atatürk's abolishment of the caliphate, spoke about the insufferable pain inflicted on Islam eighty years ago.

Secularism is a revolutionary concept in Islam. To this day, Atatürk's endeavor remains unique in the Muslim world. Indeed, it is striking how few have been encouraged to follow his example, despite Obama's assertion that he "did so much to shape the course of history". There is no clash of civilizations, but there is certainly a clash of ideas about the proper place of religion in society. By venturing into that ideological battleground, Barack Obama has assumed a challenge that is far from being politically anodyne.