Obama Leaves Behind Him a Profoundly Changed Middle East

After four years of political and personal tensions, the mutual trust between the president of the United States and Netanyahu has been restored.

President Obama leaves behind him a new Middle East. Of course, it is not what Shimon Peres had in mind — an Israeli-Palestinian collaboration integrated in joint technological and economic development. Nor is it the Middle East proposed by the Saudi crown prince in Fez in August 1981, based on the acknowledgment of Israel’s right to live in peace and safety within the borders drawn after the 1967 Six Day War. It is a new Middle East transformed by three factors: the religious war between the Sunnis and the Shiites, the “Arab Spring” and the oil revolution.

Regarding the Islamic religious war, there has been a long-time underestimation of this conflict by a secular Western world forgetful of its own religious wars — which, along with disease and famine, destroyed one third of the European population.

Regarding the “Arab Spring,” there has been ignorance of what was happening in the Arab world, which was thought to be controlled by authoritarian regimes linked to the West; the mantra of a peace tied to a solution to the Palestinian conflict was considered the primary cause of Muslim hostility toward the West and its human and democratic values.

Regarding the energy revolution, the U.S. has been transformed from one of the Arab world’s major energy customers to a major energy exporter — thanks to the development of new oil extraction techniques — and Israel has been transformed from a customer to a hydrocarbons producer.

These three main changes in the Middle East should not make us forget the impact of other factors: the disastrous American war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the economic crisis, and the emergence of China as the Middle East’s main oil customer and as Washington’s political and strategic opponent. As for now, however, President Obama’s visit to Israel, Palestine and Jordan highlights two main facts.

First, from the moment Washington reduces its involvement in the Middle East, the solution to the Palestinian conflict will be pushed to the background, forcing the two parties to negotiate directly without preliminary conditions. This means there will be encouragement but no obligation on key issues: The Palestinians will not be restrained from insisting on acknowledgement as a sovereign state by the U.N., and Israel will not be restrained from continuing to construct settlements in occupied zones.

Second, from the moment the responsibility of the containment of the Sunni-Shiite conflict and its consequences is handed to Turkey and Saudi Arabia — civil war in Syria, possible repercussions in Lebanon via the Hezbollah followers of Tehran and Assad, the humanitarian problem represented by 70,000 dead and over 1 million refugees — two Sunni powers that are threatened by the Shiite Iran, the role of Israel will change. The Hebrew state will become an essential link on this new front.

The first effects of Washington’s new strategy were seen during the U.S. president’s visit in four significant events:

— The restoration of mutual trust between Obama and Netanyahu after four years of political and personal tensions.

— Obama’s dramatic — and successful — intervention in a phone call from the Tel Aviv airport to reinitiate collaboration between Jerusalem and Ankara — including a formal apology by Netanyahu to Erdogan for the killing of eight Turkish citizens on the deck of the Marmara ship; an agreement to end the Gaza embargo of 2010; the reinstatement of ambassadors and the re-establishment of strategic collaboration.

— The possible anti-Iran collaboration between Israel and the Emirates in the Gulf was exposed on the front lines by the Shiite offensive — and perhaps new discreet contacts between Israel and the Saudis.

— Immediate financial aid was sent to the Palestinians of Ramallah — $500 million — and to the people of Jordan — $200 million.

As in war, dramatic changes of this kind are visible from the beginning, but it is impossible to foresee how they will end. This new Middle East, founded most of all on the Arab-Turk-Israeli fear of an atomic Iran, is fragile. Its development requires intelligence and political bravery that is yet to be demonstrated by Israel and Palestine. And so, it’s a bit premature to think that the sun of a new era is rising in the Middle East. However, some optimism about this region — vital to Europe, and long tormented — is legitimate after so many years of chaos and justified pessimism.