During an intense three-day trip to Israel and the West Bank last week, our group of Israel Policy Forum leaders met with high-level Israeli, Palestinian and American officials, as well as journalists and regional experts. These sessions led us to one unmistakable conclusion: The determination, focus, patience, and perseverance demonstrated by the Obama Administration are already having a significant impact on the long-standing efforts to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Furthermore, it is generally accepted that the United States has the pivotal role to play.
As always, our conversations brought home the complexity of resolving the host of territorial, security, economic, political, religious and cultural differences. One must maintain realistic expectations.
President Obama's speech in Cairo was widely lauded as a water-shed event in Arab-US relations for the tone he adopted in reaching out to the Arab world. In addressing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, he tackled the two issues which are absolutes for each of the parties: the Palestinians' renunciation of violence and the Israelis' halting settlement expansion. The president's statements were noteworthy because he founded his position on this Administration's firm belief that the resolution of this conflict is in America's national interest. For the Israelis, the message on settlements is clear: the U.S. will no longer ignore attempts to impede the pursuit of this interest. This is not a new policy; it is an important adherence to previously announced U.S. policy.
Moderate Arabs have long spoken of the settlement issue as a fundamental obstacle to progress. The continued changing of the "facts on the ground" in the West Bank undermines the credibility of the Palestinian Authority leadership while decreasing the possibility of a territorial accord. Hence, the moderate Palestinians, confronted by the wink-and-nod approach of prior American Administrations toward Israeli settlement activity, have been unwilling to take significant political risks. Obama seems to understand this dynamic and is changing this unstated American policy to enable him to bring key Arab leaders into a wider and more engaged regional process. His goal is to gain the confidence of all parties so that the US can play a robust facilitative role with real goals and real progress within the next two years.
Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech at Bar Ilan University is one of several pieces of evidence that the president's new direction is having an impact. Despite the great majority of the speech being devoted to anticipated rhetoric, for the first time Netanyahu referred to the possibility of a "Palestinian state." Even though the statement is a belated recognition of what is widely viewed as the only solution which provides peace and security to both peoples, we should, nonetheless, appreciate its significance within the context of the current Israeli government coalition that includes several parties with far right positions. Furthermore, Netanyahu's own Likud party contains leading figures whose political philosophy is grounded on the concept of a Greater Israel encompassing the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. The Prime Minister's political legitimacy hinges on his ability to maintain his leadership despite the strong countervailing forces within his coalition and his party. The major constraint to these political forces is the over-riding necessity, indeed a fundamental Israeli national interest, to maintain its "unbreakable bond" with the United States.
The meetings between Senator Mitchell and Israeli Defense Minister Barak are focusing on concepts such as "natural growth," and suggest an effort to find a workable arrangement. The issue of actually expanding settlements, as urged by the politically important adherents of the settler movement, seems to have been conceded. When viewed together with the pivotal shift of Netanyahu in adopting the two-state language, it becomes clear that only a firm hand from Washington could only have moved Israel this far.
Several other developments are no less important. Security in the West Bank continues to improve through the American-led efforts of General Keith Dayton, as evidenced by the recent willingness of the Israelis to remove some of the checkpoints which diminished the quality of life and the self-esteem of the Palestinians. Israel also recently turned over internal security in four West Bank cities to Palestinian forces.
As President Obama attempts to put all the pieces in place for a regional plan, the roles of Egypt -- mediator on Hamas issues, negotiator on Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier abducted and imprisoned by Hamas, enhanced policer of the Egypt-Gaza border -- is appreciated by the US Administration. The administration is seeking that same level of engagement by Saudi Arabia, Jordan and other moderate regimes to take actions that underscore their commitment to seeking a peaceful resolution to this conflict.
President Obama is facing a complex challenge as he continues to uphold the long-held American position that Israel's security is a central tenet of US foreign policy while he presses Israel and others in the region to take bold steps. His unswerving commitment to infusing the peace process with new terms and renewed energy is already making a unique difference -- allowing some in the region to consider how they might be part of a solution.
Follow Peter A. Joseph on Twitter: www.twitter.com/israelpolicy4m
