Welcome to the Middle East
In order to succeed where others have failed, Obama has to change the policy toward our region. First and foremost, he must fathom the importance of building in the settlements and waive the freeze demand.
The direct talks have already begun. The meetings are getting longer, but it leaves an impression that in spite of the good atmosphere, the gaps are not closing. Abu Mazen demands a continuation of the freeze and threatens to quit the talks if his demand is not accepted. Netanyahu clarifies that he cannot agree to a total freeze, and Clinton has already become Kissinger. Meanwhile, there is one sitting in the White House, by the name of Barack Obama, who, between one crisis and the next, cared to promote the initiation of contacts. But the truly strenuous stage is starting here and now; in order to succeed where others have failed — reality check here — the American president will have to change his policy in the Middle East almost entirely.
First of all, and contrary to what he has been doing until now, Obama has to understand that he shouldn’t exaggerate the importance of construction in the settlements, especially as long as it concerns the settlement blocks that are to remain in Israel’s hands in whatever future permanent agreement, nor should he define them as an insuperable obstacle on the way to peace, at least not at this stage. The reason for this is clear. Benjamin Netanyahu cannot issue a command of a renewed freeze in a full format because the moment he does, the chances of survival for his second term will be equal to those of Hapoel Tel Aviv* lifting the Champions League Cup. The possible resignations of Shas and Yisrael Beiteinu,** not to mention domestic revolt, are more than enough to remind Bibi of the horror scenario that resulted in the disruption of his first term — he’s not going let it happen for a second time.
From the Americans’ standpoint, the talks have to focus on the core issues — the problems with the borders, the refugees and future of Jerusalem. Too strong an emphasis on building in the settlements will bring about a failure of the talks earlier than expected. It should be noted in this respect that from time immemorial, all sides kept in contact even at the height of the construction periods. It was that way with Rabin, Barak, Sharon, Olmert and Netanyahu himself, too. Arafat, and later on Abu Mazen, had never demanded the building freeze as a precondition — Obama was the one to cause him to do so. Have we already said, "Reality check"?
Time for tough rhetoric
The second challenge is hidden in Obama’s ability to give both sides the space they need in order to arrive at a real and viable agreement. It was the president’s ambition to get his name on the pages of history as the ultimate mediator that made him entertain himself by presenting his own peace program a la President Bush’s Road Map or President Clinton’s outline. If he does this before the direct negotiations between us and the Palestinians are exhausted – the whole process will go down the drain. Netanyahu, like Abu Mazen, has to sense that the other side is ready for painful concessions; then we’ll be able to talk about progress for real.
Finally, the success of the negotiations in the long run depends to a large extent on the way the United States deals with Iran and its ambitions to develop nuclear weapons. Since Obama took up the post, no considerable change has been brought forth on the Iranian track. The sanctions have been administered, and the threats have been voiced, but in reality, Ahmedinejad keeps laughing all the way to the reactor in Bushehr. The time has come for more decisive activity and tougher rhetoric that will make it clear that this is the moment of truth and play time is up and over for him.
Add to this the American withdrawal from Iraq, timed to this specific moment mainly out of political considerations — let's face it, the midterm elections will be held this coming November, and this without implementing a contingency plan to fill the void the Americans are going to leave behind — we can conclude that the status of the United States in our region is undergoing a consistent decline. In this situation, the measure of the readiness of both parties to take a risk for the sake of peace under American mediation is doubtful.
And the truth is, even if Obama makes all the adjustments, this isn’t a guarantee of success. Welcome to the Middle East.
*Translator's Note: Hapoel Tel Avivi is the championship Israeli football club.
**Translator's Note: Shas and Yisrael Beiteinu are the fourth and third largest parties of the coalition, respectively.
The direct talks have already begun. The meetings are getting longer, but it leaves an impression that in spite of the good atmosphere, the gaps are not closing. Abu Mazen demands a continuation of the freeze and threatens to quit the talks if his demand is not accepted. Netanyahu clarifies that he cannot agree to a total freeze, and Clinton has already become Kissinger. Meanwhile, there is one sitting in the White House, by the name of Barack Obama, who, between one crisis and the next, cared to promote the initiation of contacts. But the truly strenuous stage is starting here and now; in order to succeed where others have failed — reality check here — the American president will have to change his policy in the Middle East almost entirely.
First of all, and contrary to what he has been doing until now, Obama has to understand that he shouldn’t exaggerate the importance of construction in the settlements, especially as long as it concerns the settlement blocks that are to remain in Israel’s hands in whatever future permanent agreement, nor should he define them as an insuperable obstacle on the way to peace, at least not at this stage. The reason for this is clear. Benjamin Netanyahu cannot issue a command of a renewed freeze in a full format because the moment he does, the chances of survival for his second term will be equal to those of Hapoel Tel Aviv* lifting the Champions League Cup. The possible resignations of Shas and Yisrael Beiteinu,** not to mention domestic revolt, are more than enough to remind Bibi of the horror scenario that resulted in the disruption of his first term — he’s not going let it happen for a second time.
From the Americans’ standpoint, the talks have to focus on the core issues — the problems with the borders, the refugees and future of Jerusalem. Too strong an emphasis on building in the settlements will bring about a failure of the talks earlier than expected. It should be noted in this respect that from time immemorial, all sides kept in contact even at the height of the construction periods. It was that way with Rabin, Barak, Sharon, Olmert and Netanyahu himself, too. Arafat, and later on Abu Mazen, had never demanded the building freeze as a precondition — Obama was the one to cause him to do so. Have we already said, "Reality check"?
Time for tough rhetoric
The second challenge is hidden in Obama’s ability to give both sides the space they need in order to arrive at a real and viable agreement. It was the president’s ambition to get his name on the pages of history as the ultimate mediator that made him entertain himself by presenting his own peace program a la President Bush’s Road Map or President Clinton’s outline. If he does this before the direct negotiations between us and the Palestinians are exhausted – the whole process will go down the drain. Netanyahu, like Abu Mazen, has to sense that the other side is ready for painful concessions; then we’ll be able to talk about progress for real.
Finally, the success of the negotiations in the long run depends to a large extent on the way the United States deals with Iran and its ambitions to develop nuclear weapons. Since Obama took up the post, no considerable change has been brought forth on the Iranian track. The sanctions have been administered, and the threats have been voiced, but in reality, Ahmedinejad keeps laughing all the way to the reactor in Bushehr. The time has come for more decisive activity and tougher rhetoric that will make it clear that this is the moment of truth and play time is up and over for him.
Add to this the American withdrawal from Iraq, timed to this specific moment mainly out of political considerations — let's face it, the midterm elections will be held this coming November, and this without implementing a contingency plan to fill the void the Americans are going to leave behind — we can conclude that the status of the United States in our region is undergoing a consistent decline. In this situation, the measure of the readiness of both parties to take a risk for the sake of peace under American mediation is doubtful.
And the truth is, even if Obama makes all the adjustments, this isn’t a guarantee of success. Welcome to the Middle East.
*Translator's Note: Hapoel Tel Avivi is the championship Israeli football club.
**Translator's Note: Shas and Yisrael Beiteinu are the fourth and third largest parties of the coalition, respectively.