Obama in Israel

Speeches, no matter how neatly done, do not resolve conflicts, especially not those that are as historically steadfast as the one between Israel and the Palestinians. Barack Obama has not gone to Jerusalem to advance a new initiative that will shake negotiations out of their stalled state; rather, he has come to remind Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the two-state solution — which has been in an apparently irreversible coma — is the only one that ensures the vital interests of Israel, given its demographic evolution. In addition, it is the only fair outcome with regard to the Palestinians and their legitimate aspirations. The president’s promise to make the issue a priority in his first term was scattered to the four winds.

The years between Obama’s encouraging speech in Cairo — during which he proposed a reconciliation of the U.S and Muslim worlds — and his messages this week have been characterized by the gradual withdrawal of the superpower as a key player in the Middle East. During this time, Netanyahu had steadily widened the reach of illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank — despite international condemnation and isolation of his country — in a fait accompli policy designed precisely to make a Palestinian state impossible. To add insult to injury, as part of his brand new administration, he has just given control of the housing department to a prominent advocate of the settlers.

Obama said again in Israel that he is willing to engage in the pursuit of peace. But fine words mean little if not accompanied by the determination to take political risks, which are much more bearable now that the occupant of the White House no longer has to wait for the verdict at the polls. Washington cannot escape its responsibilities in the region. Acknowledgment of these responsibilities should be a precursor to Secretary of State John Kerry’s arrival with a new U.S.-sponsored project for Israelis and Palestinians, a project for which Obama would be willing to fight.