Obama Wants to Go for It
For one thing, you should give the American president credit: He is much more sober today, he recognizes the obstacles, and no matter what, he insists on the talks.
Barack Obama will gain nothing from trying to resume the peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Therefore, he deserves to be given credit at least for his good intentions: The peace process won't help the American economy, won't improve his gloomy status in polls, won't save the Democratic Party in the midterm elections and won't bring back to Obama the support of some of the disappointed Jews. In other words, he's throwing the festive ceremony he initiated because he really believes that the ritual is good for Israel and the Palestinians, that it is good for America, that it is good for the world.
Obama has set a bar that looks pretentious: agreement within a year. You can giggle and pull out of the archive dozens of promises that American administrations have given in the past regarding deals slated to happen within (fill in the blank) years. Usually, in recent years at least, the time frame was two years. This is what George Bush had promised in Amman in the middle of the last decade, and what Obama promised in the beginning of his term as well. There has been no record of progress since those two episodes, but it becomes clear that the timetable has moved up. A wonder? Obama's administration has an explanation. It's not them at all — it is Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
On July 8 this year, while having a conversation at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, the premier was asked: "Do you think within a year we can arrive at an agreement similar to what happened in 1979 when Sadat and Begin negotiated a peace agreement?” Netanyahu didn't hesitate. His answer was: "Yes, I believe so." And if he believes, why should Obama doubt it?
Obama is Hoping for Assistance from Egypt and Jordan
It's not only that Obama is not going to benefit from the ceremony this week, it’s that he is even likely to lose his administration due to attacks from the right.
When he took off for summer vacation, they asked why he's having a good time when the American economy was in trouble. There are signs that the measures he undertook up to now weren’t sufficient or efficient. There is a loud demand that he should fire the economic policy managers and should roll up his sleeves to focus only on rescuing the American economy. When Obama diverts some attention to the “peace process,” he supplies ammunition to his domestic critics, who will claim that the president is killing his time toying with chanceless and hopeless matters.
Nevertheless, Obama is insisting. His messengers who came here last week reported Thursday night to Washington that Israel was insisting, too. The full freeze on the settlements won’t last. Jerusalem is showing readiness to search for a “creative” solution, but stands firm that the points of agreement are to be formalized — otherwise they are worthless. Because it’s been agreed that the freeze in its current framework is to expire by the end of September, Americans won’t have a choice but to put up with the Israeli rationale. This means that most of the convincing is going to be on the Palestinian end. The administration will offer them the opportunity to embrace the compromise, just as it has almost forcibly dragged them into the talks.
For several months, this has been the situation. The pressure on Israel has been reduced and the pressure on the Palestinians has increased. Obama hopes that help from the Egyptian and Jordanian flanks will extract him and Mahmud Abbas from the trap of confrontation with the Arab world. If that doesn’t happen, Obama risks losing the credit he’s been given here too, especially among the Middle East Arab community that has decided to invest a special effort in him.
The researcher Shibli Telhami has already proven in numbers that the popularity of Obama in the Arab world was nothing but a myth. “There is no indication that the Arabs have ever hugged Obama for who he is,” he wrote, “it has always been for the issues on the agenda, not because of his background.” Obama’s policy is going to determine whether Arabs will sympathize with him; it is also what determined and what will determine what the Israelis think about him.
Anyway, the American president’s team is way more realistic today than it was before. They understand the obstructions and can identify the stumbling blocks. They also hear the skeptics’ voices from the right and from the left, postulating that the attempt to start the engine of the process doesn’t stand any chance. And still, Obama’s men are being stubborn. They argue they haven’t seen a better proposal than this one of theirs. It could be that, at the end of the day, they won’t be more successful than their predecessors, but at the very least, you won’t be able to blame them for neglect. With a chance, without chance — Obama is ready to give it a go.
Barack Obama will gain nothing from trying to resume the peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Therefore, he deserves to be given credit at least for his good intentions: The peace process won't help the American economy, won't improve his gloomy status in polls, won't save the Democratic Party in the midterm elections and won't bring back to Obama the support of some of the disappointed Jews. In other words, he's throwing the festive ceremony he initiated because he really believes that the ritual is good for Israel and the Palestinians, that it is good for America, that it is good for the world.
Obama has set a bar that looks pretentious: agreement within a year. You can giggle and pull out of the archive dozens of promises that American administrations have given in the past regarding deals slated to happen within (fill in the blank) years. Usually, in recent years at least, the time frame was two years. This is what George Bush had promised in Amman in the middle of the last decade, and what Obama promised in the beginning of his term as well. There has been no record of progress since those two episodes, but it becomes clear that the timetable has moved up. A wonder? Obama's administration has an explanation. It's not them at all — it is Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
On July 8 this year, while having a conversation at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, the premier was asked: "Do you think within a year we can arrive at an agreement similar to what happened in 1979 when Sadat and Begin negotiated a peace agreement?” Netanyahu didn't hesitate. His answer was: "Yes, I believe so." And if he believes, why should Obama doubt it?
Obama is Hoping for Assistance from Egypt and Jordan
It's not only that Obama is not going to benefit from the ceremony this week, it’s that he is even likely to lose his administration due to attacks from the right.
When he took off for summer vacation, they asked why he's having a good time when the American economy was in trouble. There are signs that the measures he undertook up to now weren’t sufficient or efficient. There is a loud demand that he should fire the economic policy managers and should roll up his sleeves to focus only on rescuing the American economy. When Obama diverts some attention to the “peace process,” he supplies ammunition to his domestic critics, who will claim that the president is killing his time toying with chanceless and hopeless matters.
Nevertheless, Obama is insisting. His messengers who came here last week reported Thursday night to Washington that Israel was insisting, too. The full freeze on the settlements won’t last. Jerusalem is showing readiness to search for a “creative” solution, but stands firm that the points of agreement are to be formalized — otherwise they are worthless. Because it’s been agreed that the freeze in its current framework is to expire by the end of September, Americans won’t have a choice but to put up with the Israeli rationale. This means that most of the convincing is going to be on the Palestinian end. The administration will offer them the opportunity to embrace the compromise, just as it has almost forcibly dragged them into the talks.
For several months, this has been the situation. The pressure on Israel has been reduced and the pressure on the Palestinians has increased. Obama hopes that help from the Egyptian and Jordanian flanks will extract him and Mahmud Abbas from the trap of confrontation with the Arab world. If that doesn’t happen, Obama risks losing the credit he’s been given here too, especially among the Middle East Arab community that has decided to invest a special effort in him.
The researcher Shibli Telhami has already proven in numbers that the popularity of Obama in the Arab world was nothing but a myth. “There is no indication that the Arabs have ever hugged Obama for who he is,” he wrote, “it has always been for the issues on the agenda, not because of his background.” Obama’s policy is going to determine whether Arabs will sympathize with him; it is also what determined and what will determine what the Israelis think about him.
Anyway, the American president’s team is way more realistic today than it was before. They understand the obstructions and can identify the stumbling blocks. They also hear the skeptics’ voices from the right and from the left, postulating that the attempt to start the engine of the process doesn’t stand any chance. And still, Obama’s men are being stubborn. They argue they haven’t seen a better proposal than this one of theirs. It could be that, at the end of the day, they won’t be more successful than their predecessors, but at the very least, you won’t be able to blame them for neglect. With a chance, without chance — Obama is ready to give it a go.