Obama's Next Middle East Challenge

With the dust having settled following President Obama's New York meetings with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, a sober assessment of what actually happened, and what may happen next, is in order.

In the days following the bilateral meetings, the trilateral session and President Obama's speech to the General Assembly, reactions were predictable. The Israeli side, taking their cue from Netanyahu, crowed, while much of the Arab media both criticized Obama for "caving in" in the face of Israeli intransigence, and decried the humiliation of Abbas -- who was seen as having been abandoned by the U.S. on the critical issue of settlements.

In the U.S., reactions varied, ranging from supporters of the White House who keyed in on Obama's "impatience" and "sense of urgency", to critics who termed the president's performance weak and indecisive.

Several observations must be made:

- The notion that Netanyahu won and Abbas lost may be right, but only because this was a widely shared perception which will, no doubt, have political consequences, at least in the short term. The hard-line right in Israel feels emboldened, as is evidenced by some of Netanyahu's own comments and the provocative behavior of some of his supporters. Similarly, the Palestinian Authority's hard-line opponents have also felt emboldened, stepping up their criticism of Abbas' leadership.

- The claim that Obama "blinked" because Israel refused to accept a settlement freeze, thereby frustrating the president's efforts to elicit parallel confidence-building gestures from the Arab states, creating the positive environment that would have "kick started" negotiations, may also be true. But only to a degree. It can also be argued that the United States president was attempting to make the best of a bad situation by pressing forward with his three-way meeting in which he expressed his impatience and declared his determination to move forward to permanent status negotiations. How much worse would it have been, one might reasonably ask, had the president done nothing and appeared to be surrendering to a troubled impasse.

- In this context, it is important to recall that in his public and private remarks Obama made clear his intention not just to move to "negotiations without preconditions" (which is what Netanyahu may have wanted), but to move to negotiations that would address "all outstanding issues" and be based on "the historical record of past negotiations" dealing with "permanent status issues: security, borders, refugees, and Jerusalem" (which is what Netanyahu clearly did not want). And, Obama did not forsake his position that "America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements".

- This said, it appears that while Netanyahu can boast of emerging as "victor" from this round, it may be both short lived and "hollow". The negotiations he sought were to have been limited to security cooperation and economic peace. This is not what he will get. Instead, it was Obama who laid down firm markers for the content and direction of the next round.

- The president's "impatience" and "sense of urgency" should also be noted, for two reasons. Time is not on the side of peacemaking. As long as Israel drags its feet and continues to establish "facts on the ground", a peace agreement becomes more difficult to achieve. And, given the continuing dangers posed by other regional concerns, delay makes moving toward a resolution of the conflict more necessary, and at the same time, more complicated.

Because, as Obama continues to assert, a comprehensive regional peace is not just an Israeli and Arab concern, but a matter of U.S. national security interests, he insists that he is redoubling his efforts to push his team to get negotiations underway in the coming weeks.

For now, Mitchell will continue with U.S.-Israel and U.S.-Palestinian bilateral talks. As the president made clear, these intensive consultations will continue for but a short time. By mid-October, Mitchell is to report to Secretary of State Clinton, who, in turn will give a progress report to the president. Should the impasse remain, and that is the likely scenario, many believe that Obama will need to step forward making a long-awaited intervention -- laying out a plan of his own. It is at this point that the mettle of the Obama administration will truly be tested.

The bottom line to all of this is that, as unsettling and confusing as the New York events may have been, they are but a step in a longer process, setting the stage for a more substantial challenge and, possibly, another showdown in the weeks ahead, where another setback will not be an option.

Comments

[alexa07]

". . . it is important to recall that in his public and private remarks Obama made clear his intention not just to move to "negotiations without preconditions" (which is what Netanyahu may have wanted), but to move to negotiations that would address "all outstanding issues" and be based on "the historical record of past negotiations" dealing with "permanent status issues: security, borders, refugees, and Jerusalem" (which is what Netanyahu clearly did not want)."

Very interesting, James.

[Fein]

Israel-U.S­. relations are at an all time low.

Americans with any pride in their country, (obviously, Israel-firsters and Repugs are excluded) have to be outraged that our country is embarrassed by Israel, which wouldn't even exist without us. Many of these Americans are now questioning the relationship with this state

Obama wants peace in the Mid East. Israel simply wants land, now occupied by another ethnic group
We have a conflict of interest ; who's side are you on?

[alexa07]

How to have the land without its people is the moral dilemma the Israelis have always faced. They have lost the debate in the eyes of the world. It's just the US Congress, & now it appears, the Obama people who have yet to figure this out.

[Macready]

with you all the way alexa07 . . . the tide of public opinion is against israel . . . it is time Obama was bolder . . . I particularly disliked the "tabling of the Goldstone Report" and the conclusion that the US would have used its veto powers against it hence the delay until the spring . . . unbelievably cowardly and pro-status quo vis a vis israel . . . more action is needed . . . the Obama administration missed an opportunity to get the israeli's to take responsibility for their war crimes . . . if Obama is serious about peace in the Middle East the first step would have been to accept the Goldstone Report . . .

[TheLonelyGod]

"The Israeli side, taking their cue from Netanyahu, crowed, while much of the Arab media both criticized Obama for "caving in" in the face of Israeli intransigence, and decried the humiliation of Abbas -- who was seen as having been abandoned by the U.S. on the critical issue of settlement­s."

This is part of the problem: That the Arab media (and the "street"?) see it as any time Abbas doesn't get what he wants as a "humiliati­on." Therefore it's a zero-sum situation: Abbas either wins (gets everything) or loses (doesn't get everything).

It's the kind of attitude like that that encourages intransigence and stubbornness. Abbas *has* to demand a lot, because anything less than that would be a loss. But then neither Obama nor Netanyahu can accept it...and so the cycle repeats.

[Justtellthetruth]

A compelling argument with the single flaw of omission regarding the fact that so far, Israel has gotten everything and Abbas and the rest of the Palestinians have indeed gotten nothing.

The Israelis still have all the settlements in the west bank and east Jerusalem, and are growing them in size and population every day. They still maintain the occupation that is in place solely to guard the settlements and help them expand. Keep in mind that the US state department reads the Geneva convention and finds the settlements to be illegal, and that not a single other nation on earth accepts their legitimacy. Yet they have persisted and grown.

The Israelis still have a total lockdown of Gaza, controlling the borders, air and sea, and have blockaded ( a siege) just about everything.

What has Abbas gotten? Nothing.

What has the US gotten from all of this? 9/11 and the threat of more terror to come from what Bill Clinton called the Philosophical underpinning of middle eastern terrorist recruitment".

[TheLonelyGod]

Quite a perceptive post. But in fact your comments helped reinforce my original point: The Palestinians are not getting anything from Israel right now *because* they keep coming in with the viewpoint that they must get "all or nothing." Because Israel can't (or won't) give them all, they end up with nothing. See how that works?

But of course, the Palestinians do not in fact have nothing. Israel has been removing checkpoints and roadblocks for months now, and the West Bank economy has improved greatly over the past few years. It's true that Gaza is still under blockade, but then again rockets and mortars are still being shot out of there, so what would you expect?

One other thing: 9/11 was not a result of the US relationship with Israel. It was a result of the US relationship with Saudi Arabia. In fact most Islamic extremists hate Israel because they see it as a pawn of the US, not the other way round.

[mommamia526]

Ultimately, James, most of us are fed up with the ME mess and having to pay for it. Americans have their own issues. Israelis and Palestinians would like to get on with their lives. Abbas may be winning points one time, be down another time, get beaten up by Hams next, go on a trip to collect money here, and stop by Syria for a suitcase more, and put it all in his own secret account. This has been going on for decades and it has been a profitable game, for Abbas and previously for Arafat, who was not even a Palestinian. But what does it get the world community? The U.S. taxpayer? Or, even the Palestinian? Immigrants in the U.S. manage to integrate and become part of the fabric after some time. DP's in camps are absorbed over time worldwide. Life is full of disappointments, have beens, should be's, and if only"s. Ultimately, though, we have to put one foot in front of another and march on, or die. Read Thich Nhat Hahn, "Peace is Every step", and understand it. This monk came to his insight via suffering. That simple book was written after experiencing the ultimate fight for survival. Breathe in, breathe out, set one foot in front of the other, walk on, keep living. Life, James, is not about winning and making points. Life is about living, about trying, about cooperating, about making improvements. Life is not another person's or another country's responsibility.

[phute]

mommamia..­.....whils­t you're going on about money - go read up on unconditional aid to Israel fromt he US.And then you can ask what the US taxpayer gets for that.
Oh - and you forgot to mention Israel's other bogeyman - the EU. They've given aid to the Palestinians too.

[Taxi]

Follow the money, as they say:

http://www.rense.com/general31/rege.htm

[mommamia526]

Well, actually Phute, I am not going on about money, and I am pricking a hole in the balloon of Arabian and Abbas' pride for the sake of ...the Palestinians! That is strange, because I am a jew and all for Israel. I believe that no progress will ever be made that would not include the Palestinians. I WANT the Palestinians to have a better life, for their sakes and for Israel's sake. You see, if Palestinians do better, they will be interested in trading, in learning, in moving forward. That is also in the best interest of Israel. Israelis can do trades with them and everyone else, and go on with research to improve everyone's life. Israel and Jordan I hear are planning a connection between the Dead sea and the Red sea. One of the issues connected to that, but not the only one, is an opportunity to get water for the area, and Palestinians are right there on that trajectory. I have met Arabs, including Palestinians, and family members have Arab friends. Money would be good for Arabs to set up a little business, a.o. microloans. Money is NOT good if it goes in the coffers of, in the past Arafat, and now Abbas. Money must be applied to do something, otherwise it is just numbers, or paper buried in the ground.

[mommamia526]

Aid is not a problem. Money is not a problem. Throwing money away is a problem. Using people, Palestinians included, as chesspieces to keep getting paid and doing nothing, or, at least not achieving anything, is not right. I do not know Netanyahu. Never met him and have not followed him much. Never had any time for politics. I had better things to do. Now I am old, and I am putting in a few cents, here and there, of opinion. My opinion should not be an endgoal, it is not at all for me. It should get people talking, thinking and coming up with a better idea. After all, I am an old granny. Others should be able to do better than I can. Abbas is using people, Palestinians, and so is Hamas. Hamas and Hezbullah are also using Israeli captives. Palestinians are used to attack and are being imprisoned. It all serves nothing, least of all the Palestinians. In THEIR lives not one thing changes for the better. Netanyahu has proposed an economic development program. The U.S. is helping Palestinians develop their military. Abbas is concerned with his pride. So is Hamas. Abbas, by he way, is a Sephardic jewish name. A jewish scientist did some genetic and cultural research among Palestinians in Israel and found identical genetic markers, and Palestinians light *Sabbath* candles, but on Thursday and Friday. Jews do exactly the same on Friday and Saturday.

[lbsaltzman]

Unfortunately we cannot morally extricate ourselves from the mess, since we are responsible for so much of it. By enabling Israel to be a heavily armed bully, we are responsible for the havoc and violence Israel has caused. We are responsible for the suffering that Palestinians and Lebanese have endured in the countless wars and massacres Israel has launched. In short we share in the war crimes and must now play a role in ending the violence.

I do think we should stop all foreign aid, particularly military aid to Israel. Enough is enough they can stand on their own two feet.

[Sinick]

President Obama should be focusing on the Wall Street and health care crooks. To hell with the Olympics! Let the Middle East run amok! Palestine and Israel have no oil reserves so really, why should we care?

Better yet, how about we concentrate on the issues that affect Main Street?

[Freenation]

wow so by your logic...oi­l is the reason for all US wars...

[Kirby]

This "bury your head in the sand" attitude is what has gotten us into this untenable mess, to begin with, and most Americans are getting fed up with Israel as represented by the likes of Netanyahu both in Israel and in its American Lobby. Already, under the table efforts to undermine, weaken, and politically destroy Obama on the issue of health care are the order of the day on the part of the US Israeli contingent, hell bent on maintaining the status quo. This, so a mortally wounded Obama cannot move all toward a comprehensive settlement. There is an enemy of the majority of the American People afoot in the halls of Congress. When, oh when, will we have the courage to out these screaming-­the-epithe­t, "anti-semitism" thugs?