Obama and the Middle East Conflict

We believe that the Palestinian-Israeli peace process is one issue that requires priority and concerted efforts of all states, and that the United Nations which was central to the establishment of the State of Israel must not remain on the sideline in the process.

Recently, President Barack Obama while speaking to the famous Israeli lobby in Washington remarked that ‘The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognised borders are established for both states.’  This is the most unambiguous statement from any US president on the border problem that has dogged the effort to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through a two states solution. Israel has always maintained that it was unable to negotiate with the Palestinians due to the lack of a sole elected spokesperson. It is significant given the pro-democratic uprisings that are sweeping through the Arab world. Perhaps the resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict can become part of the democratic opening in the Arab world.

Hopeful as Obama’s speech is, Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, rejected the proposal as ‘indefensible.’ Netanyahu has insisted that reverting to the 1967 border will leave Israel defenceless. He also insisted that a sovereign, viable Palestinian state cannot be negotiated as long as Hamas, the Islamist organisation, does not recognise the state of Israel. In the past, Hamas has indicated that it would be willing to recognise Israel, if Israel’s borders are precisely defined. Israel, on the other hand, has responded that they will resolve the border dispute as one more point on a laundry list of problems which, among others, includes water rights, the return of Palestinian refugees, and the status of Jerusalem.

Although the United States has been a central figure in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, it will be misplaced to think that it can resolve the conflict as a third party mediator. This is not simply because of the special relationship with Israel, but also because of the influence of states like Syria and Iran which are fundamentally opposed to the idea and reality of the Jewish state.

Netanyahu has been able to resist Washington’s pressure regarding a ban on construction of new settlements. Obama was silent during the Gaza war, but showed his concern when he appointed George Mitchell as his Middle East envoy two days into his presidency. Mitchell was reputed to have been the brain behind the resolution of the conflict in Northern Ireland; the hope was that he could pull off the same extraordinary trick with Israelis and Palestinians.

Even so, we believe that the Palestinian-Israeli peace process is one issue that requires priority and concerted attention of all states, and that the United Nations which was central to the establishment of the State of Israel must not remain on the sideline in the process.  A step at a time on the road to peace is worse than no step at all.  But effort must be made to ensure that the peace process will not remain a case of one step forward and two steps backward.