Obama in Israel: The Near East Humbles the American President

One largely won the presidential election, but must conserve his electoral base for the upcoming parliamentary battles; the other, maintaining power by a small majority, seeks to forge alliances to form a viable government. Suffice to say, we should not expect daring or significant advances from the meeting between Barack Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu. The two men seek, above all, to avoid past errors and missteps and are now careful not to provoke each other (which was not always the case). Diplomatic caution recommends sticking to positions of principal and, above all, discussing issues of common concern.

Regarding recurring issues, the revival of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process remains at the objective (far-off) stage. The Democratic president cannot escape, but he has nothing new to offer. Obama, during his first official visit to Israel, also visited Ramallah (under Palestinian authority) in the West Bank and Jordan. Duly noted. For those who question why he waited until his second term to visit Jerusalem, he can answer that George W. Bush, who cannot truly be suspected of trying to keep distance from Israel, did not make the same trip until seven years into his presidency. Obama can also add, without lying, that he increased American aid to Israel and gave them access to the most advanced technology and military equipment.

To those on the Palestinian side, who are reminded of his good words on the necessary cessation of Israeli colonization and the return to the 1967 borders, the visit offers the shriveled illusion of a return to peace negotiations. On this point, it puts the two sides back to back: Netanyahu can always declare the resumption of talks to be favorable, but knowing that Israel intends to continue unabated settlement of the occupied territories and that the immediate cessation of these settlements is demanded as a prerequisite by the Palestinians, no dialogue is possible. In renouncing his ambition as peacemaker, which he displayed internationally after his first election, the American president puts an end to great expectations. Obama I does not renounce Obama II; he notes and accepts his withdrawal. We can take him to trial and we can also credit him his sense of realism given the situation.

In any case, the Nobel Peace Prize made numerous concessions to modesty. This is helped by the dramatic situation in the Middle East, a region of the world where the permanence of a conflict without visible solutions does not prevent the occurrence of other, potentially more destructive, explosions. One takes precedence over the other in order of emergencies. The American president’s visit to Amman shows that strategic priorities evolve in a troublesome fashion. Supporting King Abdullah, an important ally of the U.S., weakened by the increasing flow of Syrian refugees, is now more vital than any other question. The effects of this situation don’t escape Obama, who used them in an attempt to get the U.S. out of the Israeli-Palestinian deadlock. Nor do they escape Netanyahu, who seeks to downplay the Palestinian issue by highlighting the Iranian threat and its disturbing ramifications in Syria. To summarize: Obama will discuss Iran (and Syria) in Israel, and discuss Syria (and again Iran) in Jordan. The question of a Palestinian state is coming out, step by step, in the history books.