Obama admits US underestimated Israeli-Palestinian deadlock

[IndianaGreen]

Obama admits US underestimated Israeli-Palestinian deadlock

US president tells Time magazine his efforts to secure a Middle East peace deal have failed

Chris McGreal in Washington
The Guardian, Friday 22 January 2010

Barack Obama has admitted that his attempts to break the political deadlock in the Middle East by pressuring Israel to end the construction of Jewish settlements have failed.

He said he raised expectations of a breakthrough too high because he underestimated the political obstacles involved – an acknowledgement that he was unable to force the hand of the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu.

"The Middle East peace process has not moved forward and I think it's fair to say, for all our efforts at early engagement, is not where I want it to be," he told Time magazine. "This is just really hard … This is as intractable a problem as you get. If we had anticipated some of these political problems on both sides earlier, we might not have raised expectations as high."

Obama made a push to break the political logjam in his first months in office. Unusually for an American administration, he focused his pressure on the ­Israelis by demanding that Netanyahu halt all Jewish settlement construction in the occupied territories. The growing settlements are widely considered to be one of the major obstacles to peace and a test of the sincerity of Israeli claims to accept an independent Palestinian state.

Obama put pressure on Netanyahu at a testy meeting in Washington in May, leading to a strain in relations rarely seen between the two governments. But the White House disappointed the Palestinian leadership by weakening its demand in the face of Israeli resistance.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/22/obama-middle-east-israel-palestinians-settlements

[HeresyLives]

1. No peace? No money and no weapons.

It isn't rocket science.

[IndianaGreen]

3. Perhaps the US should just get out of the way and become truly neutral

The US has been playing a bipolar role, acting like an honest broker while at the same time enabling Israeli actions that perpetuate the Occupation.

Let's begin by publicly admitting that the peace "process" was a dismal failure and that it is time for a new approach.

[Arctic Dave]

4. That would make sense. Plus, it's not "chessy".

[Taitertots]

11. Only if it is for both sides

No aid to Palestine until the rockets stop.
No aid to Israel until the expansion stops.

[bemildred]

2. Maybe we need to use "harsh measures"? nt

[RZM]

5. lol

'His efforts?' There's a euphemism and then some. 'Hey Bibi . . . Stop constructing settlements or I'll . . . Just stop the settlements ok?' The notion that Obama was even remotely serious about changing the status quo is ridiculous. I'm not saying he doesn't want peace or even a more generous settlement for the Palestinians than has previously been on the table, but he sure ain't interested in spending any political capital of his own on it. As much as I hate to say it, I can't blame him that much. The status quo is far easier from his perspective and he's made it clear that domestic policies are taking priority right now.

It's not really do-able either. Israel needs to withdraw to 1967 lines and recall hundreds of thousands of settlers -- the Palestinians need to dismantle or castrate Hamas and somehow sell the notion of two states and no right of return to their general public. Anybody who seriously tries any of this stuff on either side is guaranteeing the end of their political career and practically asking to be assassinated (the latter is especially true on the Palestinian side, since they are the weaker, less stable partner and will have to yield on more 'untouchable' demands).

As sad as it is, cutting off US aid to Israel might make the situation even worse, as it would remove what little constraints there are on Israel's behavior and transform it into a true 'rogue state.' And that would never happen anyway.

[pelsar]

7. pretty good summary....but one note....

As sad as it is, cutting off US aid to Israel might make the situation even worse, as it would remove what little constraints there are on Israel's behavior and transform it into a true 'rogue state.' And that would never happen anyway.

the constraints which prevents israel from really using blanket force is from the israeli population not from some external "moral force emitting from the US-see US predator strikes, destruction of iraq, for example of the US's moral authority and standard. (I noticed that the amount of civilians killed by those predator strikes doesn't seem to get in to the news much, if at all)

the real problem woud be, and this is my guess, is the precision weapons and their research. All very very expensive. Keeping helicopters in the air for split second shooting of kassam crews....very expensive. Researching and developing weapons systems with expensive missiles to shoot down home made kassams that cost a few dollars, very expensive.

i would guess that a reduction in the military grants and loans, would in the end, cost more Palestinian lives.......and others since the precision research and development is also shared with the US forces as part of the conditions. I realize that stopping the flow is the favorite point of pressure to reduce the violence, but in the I/P conflict things are never that simple and such views can make matters worse for the people involved.

[RZM]

8. Excellent points

It's certainly true that aside from broad consensuses on basic security issues and the maintenance of Israel's 'Jewish character,' there's plenty of disagreement within Israel about all manner of policies and since it's a parliamentary democracy that requires governing coalitions, the 'doves' have critical influence. No doubt they play a restraining role.

I certainly didn't mean to imply that US 'moral force' matters one whit either. I question how much US moral force (the importance of which, IMO, has always been over-estimated in America) has influenced the security policies of any nation, let alone one as isolated and militarized as Israel.

What I meant to imply was that a cancellation of aid would logically be accompanied by concomitant reductions/downgrades of other ties, such as intelligence cooperation, diplomatic support, and non-military ties, i.e. a 'deterioration of relations' scenario where the US plays 'hardball' in order to force concessions. In such a situation, you might see the Israeli right breaking left and compromising, or the left breaking right, at which point there would would be less of a restraining influence. Or perhaps, not a whole lot would change . . . I don't know. All I know for sure is that any major changes in US policy are unlikely in the near future, as Obama's statement seems to show.

[pelsar]

9. a unique characteristic of the conflict

one thing to keep in mind....is that in this conflict its the right that makes the peace, not the left. The left puts out the ideas, get the concept in the media and then waits for the conditions for the right to implement it.

in israel, its only the right that can neutralize the *right* and its only the left that can put forth the idea....and its the Palestinians/arabs that can create the conditions for the move.....

not much room for the US or Europe here....Obama did a smart move.....get out of the way and let the local dynamics take over. What comes next is anybodies guess, depending upon ones belief. A quick summary

hamas has gaza and wants the westbank
abbas is weak, needs the IDF to keep hamas weak, but cant do anything realistically but make noise
Egypt has closed off gaza for reasons of its own
al quida and iran and hizballa are in gaza-and some oppose hamas as being too weak, while supporting hamas
limited supplies goes from israel to gaza, the population is in poor shape
they still hold gilad shalit
they still shoot some kassams and grads
westbank is very quiet with an expanding economy
israels economy is stable
settlers still playing cat and mouse with the govt and harassing the Palestinians

none of the above will change regardless of what the US or Europe do....but dont worry something will happen, it always does to cause change.

[peacetalksforall]

6. Israel isentrentched in the U.S. at the highest levels of government and with total

collaboration of policy, military, and intelligence. Stop the money flow, the contract flow - and swing the support to the Palestinians? I would warn the Palestinians instead. I don't think we understand how firmly Israeli policy is entrenced. The Gaza is now a ghetto - surrounded with nothing coming in to help the people rebuild. Don't forget the water. Israel took over their coast. And fish. Egypt went with Israel.

Wanted. Countries to take the rest of the Palestinians in as refugees.

They cut down the Palestinians' olive trees and moved into their homes.

Can the message coming from Israel be made stronger? It's a message in a totally physical context.

How would you like to live in the rubble of last years' war against Gaza.

[cqo_000]

10. Obama says being president is hard work! lol

he told Time magazine. "This is just really hard …

now where have I heard that before......... hmmm