Obama's Two-State Challenge

President Obama's May 18th meeting with Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will introduce a new dimension to the long standing American-Israeli alliance. The changing circumstances in the Middle East and the potentially diverging views each leader holds in connection with the Arab-Israeli conflict could make finding common ground more challenging than in the past. To preserve the integrity of the bilateral relations, both leaders can be expected to engage in some serious give and take. President Obama is likely to insist that there must be significant progress made in the Arab-Israeli peace process, especially regarding the Palestinian front. Similarly, Netanyahu, a master tactician, will find a way to accommodate the president while also exacting assurance that the US will deal pointedly with the Iranian nuclear threat.

The United States' commitment to Israel's national security is embedded in the American psyche and transcends shared values or an influential lobby. A long history of moral commitment to a homeland for the Jews, strategic cooperation, evangelical grass-root support, cultural and political affinity have all cemented the relationship over the years, making Israel the closest US ally perhaps with the exception of Great Britain. That being said, however militarily powerful Israel might be, the country's ultimate security still depends on the United States and only together can they fashion a solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict while safeguarding Israel's national security. This has guided previous American Presidents and will certainly guide President Obama -- no Israeli prime minister is oblivious to this reality.

The United States' dedication to the two-state solution is not a new policy and it has been central to the Road Map, Oslo accords, Madrid Peace Conference, and to every interim agreement between Israel and the Palestinians and previous American administrations. Mr. Netanyahu cannot simply deny or defer the discussion in hopes of persuading or coercing the Palestinians and the Arab states to settle for much less. President Obama finds himself in a unique position to push for the resumption of the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations not only because he feels committed to the idea, but because of the conversion of events and developments that offer both the opportunity for a solution and also bear ominous implications if nothing is done.

Mr. Obama has inherited the wrath of the Arab and Muslim world, precipitated mainly by his predecessor's policies: two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and a third shaping up in Pakistan, a potentially nuclear Iran and the continuing rise in extremism, terrorism and Jihadi movements. By every conceivable account the Israeli-Palestinian discord feeds into these violent conflicts, making it impossible for any American President to articulate practical solutions without attending to the Israeli-Palestinian issue first. Neither Netanyahu nor any of his coalition partners can avoid this reality. Obama faces an international community that was less than supportive of Israel's recent military incursion into Gaza, and allies who want to see once and for all a final solution for the Palestinian people. For President Obama to unravel some of these menacing developments with the support of any international partners, he must first put out the Arab-Israeli fires.

Driven by their concern over Iran's nuclear program, the growing Sunni-Shiite schism, and the threat of Islamic extremism, the Arab states -- for the first time since the creation of Israel in 1948 -- appear ready to negotiate in honest a comprehensive peace deal with Israel. Anyone who underestimates the significance of the Arab Peace Initiative in this regard misses the historic dimension of the Initiative, which offers Israel the ultimate security it seeks. Fortunately it was not missed by President Obama. The president's embrace of the Initiative, which he expressed personally to Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah, is pivotal to changing the dynamics of the conflict and reaching a solution. For Israel, this represents nothing less than a revolutionary transformation in the Arab states' attitude and it must find a way to capitalize on its long-term implications.

President Obama is as keen as Mr. Netanyahu that Iran's nuclear program is, at a minimum, politically destabilizing and may indeed pause a threat to Israel's national security. To suggest however that a resolution to Iran's nuclear ambition must take precedence over a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is based on a false premise. As long as the Palestinian conflict persists, one can count on Tehran to fan the flames and continue to undermine the prospect of a comprehensive solution which will have to include Syria.

In one form or another, President Obama's commitment to pursue the Israeli-Palestinian track has already paid some dividends. Hamas leader Khaled Meshal -- under pressure from the Arab states and certainly in a nod to Mr. Obama -- has indirectly supported the idea of a two-state solution by supporting a Palestinian state based on 1967 borders. This development considerably improves the prospect of a unity Palestinian government that can speak in one voice, and has the potential to deliver on a long-term ceasefire. Hamas is here to stay and it is now impracticable to count them out of the equation on any peace agreement. Netanyahu can take solace in the fact that Hamas moderated its stance under his watch and respond with a favorable gesture, especially now that Hamas has suspended all acts of violence against Israel.

As he understands Syria's central role in any future Arab-Israeli negotiations, President Obama's outreach to Damascus is most significant and overdue. Damascus is ready and eager to resume, this time directly, serious peace negotiations with Israel while seeking normal relations with the United States. Surely the price tag is the return of the Golan Heights -- a price that Israel will have to pay if it ever chooses to end the Arab-Israeli conflict. But for Mr. Obama, this also represents an historic opportunity not only to end the Israeli-Syrian conflict but forge a grand regional security arrangement that would address Iran's ambitions. Indeed, only a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace that can eventually draw in Iran will usher in a period of real calm and open the door to credible talks about a Middle East free of nuclear arms.

In the end, the incredible bond between Israel and the United States will prevail, as it is stronger than any one administration or leader. Obama has the maneuverability to push on Netanyahu because it is guaranteed that the US would never compromise Israel's security. It is with the Arab states that the US has lost major capital, and President Obama knows that if he does not deliver soon, he can risk losing any partners in peace. If he cannot regain the confidence of Arab leaders in countries like Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, the US will have another major conflict on its hands.

There is no doubt that the discussions between the two leaders will be tough, but neither can lose sight of what is really at steak here. Netanyahu knows only too well that in the final analysis, only a comprehensive peace will offer Israel the ultimate security it seeks. President Obama sees an historic opportunity to achieve just that, while both understand the ominous implications if they fail.

Comments

[powercosmic]

If I were Palestinian I would agree to nothing but a ONE STATE solution, If I were Iran I would shutdown the Nuclear program and take the western concessions because Nuclear weapons aren't going to help Iran beat Israel nor will they be necessary. Israel, and Obama must surely know this.

The reason the Arabs don't have to worry about winning is that the US economy is all but collapsed, a rise in crude oil prices like the kind we can expect due to crude oil supply declines will push the global economy into further decline.

The US will soon be beating a fast-track to the 1800's when it was an agrarian society, the US military and its economy cannot even hope to mount a WWII style ramp-up like the kind that would be required to defeat Russia and China in a bid to take over the remaining Oil resources.

Every important major field that the US uses for its crude oil import supply has peaked and is in decline. Ghawar, Cantarell, North Sea, the list goes on.

If I were Israeli I would be hoping to form a democratic single state and look forward to sharing the region with my Arab next-door neighbors it just a matter of time.

Need proof? Tar sands baby...

[Justtellthetruth]

While many in the US may have some sympathy for Israel, It would be wrong to characterize the nature of the average US citizens view of Israel in quite the way that Mr. Ben-Meir has. Just read the comments in ANY major internet news source.

What is immediately apparent to people in the age of Internet news is th that the settlements are a form of apartheid and ethnic cleansing, and that the growth of settlements RELY on the "peace process" which have never made their cessation and total removal a precondition for talks. While terror may be sporadic, the settlements carry on and grow every day, creating daily misery for millions, while serving to inspire terror against the US and Israel throughout the middle east.

Many Americans cringe at the idea of being "linked" in some sort of "special relationship" with apartheid and ethnic cleansing, and are seriously questioning the wisdom of continuing to fund a state that employs these methods with no regard for the damage they cause in their own home, and now, after 9/11, in ours.

I would like to see Israel safe and secure. The only way to achieve this is the total removal of all settlements and IDF, and the introduction of a UN based mostly Arab peace keeping force to keep both sides honest.

If Israel refuses to end the settlements, the US should cut ties with Israel until they comply with our (and virtually the rest of the worlds) wishes.

[Macready]

I hope you are wrong about the bonds between the US and israel . . . the US owes israel nothing . . israel has destroyed itself and the US must no longer support, nor aid and abeit israel. israel has threatened to nuke Iran . . . clearly israel only cares about itself . . . Iran at least is a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty . . israel is not . . .yet it is illegally sitting on a nuclear arsenal . . israel breaks international law every day . . . israel has to be made to abide by international law and sign up to the Geneva Convention .. . . America owes israel nothing . . . and has no moral or any other obligation to continue to aid israel . . . old habits die hard . . . but the habit of funding israel must be broken if there is to be a lasting peace in the Middle East

[jake1492]

"....at steak.."?

"..... at stake..." perhaps...­.

Hopefully Prime Minister Netanyahu's position as a consistent hawk will allow him the credibility to enter a beneficial arrangement with the Palestinians that will bring much of the hard right elements of the Israeli public along. A prime minister less credible on defense probably couldn't do it.

[Freenation]

"Obama has the maneuverability to push on Netanyahu because it is guaranteed that the US would never compromise Israel's security"

yeah right, the same security which has caused deaths of thousands of civilians.­...

[chaos4700]

And thousands of American lives, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives. Or do people forget that Israel was just about the only country willing to stand behind and substantiate Bush's falsified intel to justify the war in Iraq?

[Antifascist-08]

Excellent article! This IS very complex, but Obama is on the right rack. We may all be rewarded with something historic sooner than we think.

This isn't going to be business as usual. The ingredients are here for success. The recent moves by Hamas point to this. iran will want in and her neighbors will want them in as well. We can't solve this by ourselves or even with Israel. Obama is laying the groundwork right now for a big move.

Peace before the first term is up. Book it.

[chefrasta]

Where do your loyalties lie.With Israel or the United States?

[Antifascist-08]

Why do you care? Did you read the article? He speaks the truth. And this truth can bring an accord during Obama's first term.

This isn't about Israel OR the US. It is about peace.

[chaos4700]

Then when is Israel pulling its colonists out of occupied territory and returning to its recognized borders? Because peace doesn't happen until Israel respects international law.

[HelloFunnyWorld]

Shalom Alon, hello,
Thanks for this post.

It is a challenge all right. But not for the US President. He has nothing to lose. Not at all.
Mr.Obama being so much young-er than the problem he cares deeply about resolving - has a better chance of making long lasting peace possible in the Middle East & peace between israel and the Palestinians than any other world leader.

Israel has completely lost the only thing it had that really mattered: It's Moral high ground. The challenge is Nethnyahu's and Israel's; it's Right wing parties; Aipac; the Settlers, etc. Not the US President's.

Times have changed. The whole world is engaged in wanting and working towards Fairness. Justice. Both Politically. And Economically.

Now, we all watch. And witness. Our collective future History being played out.

We hope Mr.Nethany­ahu is doing the same. The choices are, his.

All we know is: This world needs leaders with - Integrity. Decency. Character. Honour. Dignity. Ethical. Principled. Etc.etc. - Good stuff that helps resolve conflicts, which is what they're there for. These values.

[Antifascist-08]

Great points. Obama may have nothing to lose, as you say, but what he does have is the political capital and the smarts to make this work. I'm betting on it.

[nomoredead]

" The world needs leaders with-Integrity. Decency. Character. Honour. Dignity. Ethical. Principled­.etc. "
Sounds like your describing former president Carter.

[angler]

Eventually the American people will awaken from their long slumber and realize that their blind, unconditional support of Israel has been a huge mistake for both the U.S. and for Israel.

[Antifascist-08]

There is nothing wrong with supporting israel, but unconditional support of their policies IS a mistake. I believe the Israeli people want peace and they want a 2 state solution. Why they keep electing hawks is another story.

The weight of this energy is going to change the story this time. People are starting to believe that it can be done- on all sides.

We do need to get past all the ideology and get down to making it work.

[TammyKnowsBest]

Better institutions, NOT Partition is the only answer when you are negotiating both sides identities which are attached to this land and they coexist together more or less. Repeating this tired mantra is wrong and will result in a two state conflict instead.

Instead of negotiating implementing human rights for all, negotiations bargain with both sides human rights.

[fizzette]

"In the end, the incredible bond between Israel and the United States will prevail"

In the end, the parasitic bond between Israel and the United States will end.

[Macready]

well said fizzette -- israel's parasitic bond on the US has to end . . . . and now

[toomuchtolose]

Agreed. The US needs to tell Israel that Israel is on its own. No more financial or military support from the US. Israel can stand or fall. With no more assistance from the US, Israel has to stop the bullying..­. has to realize just how small that country is.

[melissamsouza]

Excellent. Thank you.