Third, it has been established, by and large, that the Obama administration has not opted to apply the kind of pressure that should be applied on Israel in order for the latter to be forced into accepting fairness, justice and international legitimacy as the basis for a peace agreement with the Palestinians 

Second, Israel is not genuinely interested in working out a just solution through good-faith negotiations with the Palestinians; therefore, there is little the U.S. could hope to achieve without a genuine change in the Israeli mindset. This is not seen possible under the present political conditions, particularly that hawks are ruling Israel and they are determined to consolidate and legitimize their grip on the West Bank.

Third, it has been established, by and large, that the Obama administration has not opted to apply the kind of pressure that should be applied on Israel in order for the latter to be forced into accepting fairness, justice and international legitimacy as the basis for a peace agreement with the Palestinians. (Hamas considers Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has a myopic vision or trusting Obama to bring about changes in U.S. policy towards the Middle East).

Fourth, Abbas appears to have given up all hopes of peace with Israel and does not want anything to do with the Palestinian presidency anymore. He seems to be ready to quit leading the Palestinian struggle, a position he inherited from Yasser Arafat. Again, if Abbas indeed stands down, then according to the Palestinian law, the head of the national assembly will be acting president. That head is Hamas leader Aziz Duweik, and that would further complicate the Palestinian quandary. Then, there would not be a Palestinian Authority and thus no one for the U.S. to deal with even if it wanted to.

Fifth, Washington’s reluctance to apply pressure on Israel is translated by the Arab and Muslim worlds as bias in favor of Israel, and this only adds to the hostility towards the U.S. and undermines America’s strategic interests.
In sum, the scales are tilted against Washington because of Israel’s refusal to accept a fair settlement of its problem with the Palestinians and because the split in the ranks of the Palestinians. As such, political pundits in the U.S. and Europe are suggesting that the Obama administration should simply take its hands off and let the rest of the international community handle the effort for peace in Palestine.

 One of the key arguments that Obama put up in his failed effort to convince Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to freeze settlement activity in the West Bank was that Israel’s security should be based on a fair agreement with the Palestinians and that the U.S. remains, as always, Israel’s committed protector 

At the same time, the U.S.’ disengagement from the process would be more meaningful and effective if it would also mean scaling down Washington’s “strategic alliance” with Israel and a suspension of all American economic and military assistance to Israel. It is a very tricky area here, with the foregone conclusion that no U.S. president would be able to withstand pressure from the pro-Israeli lobby and seek fundamental changes in the U.S.-Israel relationship, where the latter calls all the shots. That puts the situation back to square one, with the only plus point (for the Arabs) being that the U.S.-Israeli relationship is under strain, notwithstanding all the diplomatic talk and niceties.

One of the key arguments that Obama put up in his failed effort to convince Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to freeze settlement activity in the West Bank was that Israel’s security should be based on a fair agreement with the Palestinians and that the U.S. remains, as always, Israel’s committed protector. But Netanyahu, who has his own political compulsions against such arguments, stood his ground, and Obama was found wanting. No doubt, Obama feels bruised from his encounters with Netanyahu, who is also exploiting the decline in his popularity in the U.S.. He would not have been able to stare down Obama had the U.S. leader scored tangible success in resolving the crisis in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the nuclear dispute with Iran, among other issues. The mauling the Republicans gave Obama over his health reform bill also took its toll on his popularity.

Some analysts suggest that Obama could make an effort at enlisting the support of the people of Israel by addressing them directly and reassuring them that he is not trying to take away their “rights” or to punch a hole in their “security”. But that approach might be a little too late. An opinion poll conducted in August found that only around 4 per cent of Israelis believed Obama is pro-Israel, while 51 per cent believed that he was more pro-Palestinian than pro-Israel.

Obama finds himself with few options left to pursue his efforts and deliver on his promise of a two-state solution in Palestine. Indeed, he might have a different game plan in mind, and one is still hoping that he is the only American president who can deliver now on his promises to the Arabs and Muslims.




*Published in Jordan's THE JORDAN TIMES on Nov. 15, 2009.