Impetus to Rethink

The mood changed in Israel after Barack Obama’s visit. While Israel does not need regime change, it does need to rethink, and President Obama has provided that impetus.

Obama has scored the same success as former Egyptian President Anwar el Sadat on his November 1977 Jerusalem visit to befriend the Israelis. At the time, the gesture completely blew away Israelis: For the first time, the leader of the world’s largest Arab nation — a nation with which Israel had fought several bloody wars — did them the honor of reaching out to them. In this case, the U.S. president’s role is totally different: Obama came to Israel as the highest representative of Israel’s closest ally — he was never an enemy.

However, many Israelis have not considered Obama a friend for some time. To them, he seemed distant, cool and especially critical of their government and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. They held it against him that he embarked on a Middle East trip during his first term and neglected to stop in Israel. They assumed a black president, influenced by the American Civil Rights movement and with the middle name Hussein, probably had little understanding of the concerns of Jewish people.

Such opinions are no longer heard in Israel after his three-day visit, however. The mood has changed in a way reminiscent of Sadat’s visit. Sadat’s speech was also warmly received by the Israeli people. In his addresses to the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, Sadat was able to seize on political substance by using plain language about the compromises necessary for peace, generating excitement at the prospect at the same time.

They Hung on His Every Word

Obama experienced the same success on Thursday while speaking to Israeli students. They were mesmerized even when Obama brought up uncomfortable truths: above all that Israel must end its occupation of the West Bank if it is to remain a democratic and Jewish nation. While Obama did not state how this might be accomplished in exact terms, Middle East peace has never wanted for plans. There have been many, including the Clinton Parameters, Road Map and Geneva and Arab initiatives — just to mention a few of the better known.

The snag has more to do with political psychology or the inability to see the situation as the other side sees it, such as when understanding Israel’s existential fear that results in its harsh tone or that Palestinian impotence causes anger because Palestinians are helpless to determine the details of their everyday lives while under foreign control. Without security for Israel and sovereignty for the Palestinians, there will never be a negotiated two-state solution. Obama understands that better than many Middle East experts, who have grown cynical during 20 years of failed peace negotiations.

Obama made no allies in Ramallah by cozying up to Israel during his Jerusalem visit. An unequivocal demand for a freeze on Israeli settlement expansion — for which Obama stopped short of asking — would have accomplished more than just the friendly words. The Palestinian camp would have preferred it if Obama had put more pressure on Netanyahu’s government instead of showering the Israelis with sympathy and compliments.

Making a sober calculation, however, Obama employed the old Chinese adage: Bathe hard enemies in soft water. With a new Israeli cabinet that is further to the right than before, a peace breakthrough simply will not happen. Netanyahu’s priority remains success in preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear power. He will need to work closely with the White House, [a collaboration] that could make Israeli hardliners more agreeable toward Obama’s desire for goodwill measures toward the Palestinians.

The Way Things Were before the Arab Spring

Small steps, like Israel surrendering control of one access point to the nascent Palestinian city of Rawabi or amnesty for old prisoners, will at least help defuse the animosity between the two peoples. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry will be exploring how to re-establish the nevertheless necessary trust for peace negotiations to have a chance.

Hopefully, Obama leaves him a field for new seeds to sprout — seeds sown during Obama’s enthusiastically received speech to Israeli students. He counseled them not to leave things to politicians but to actively take part in ensuring a better and more peaceful future. He gave the same advice to students in Cairo four years ago. The Arab Spring occurred a little over a year later. Israel does not need regime change but a rethinking of attitudes. Peace begins in people’s imaginations. Obama has provided an impetus in that direction.