There is sufficient evidence that the Obama administration intends to--is even determined to--change its image in the Middle East by pursuing an alternative approach to that of the previous administration.
The question remains, however, whether the US president will know how, and if he indeed can.
The appointment of George Mitchell as envoy; recent active Middle East diplomacy including Washington summit meetings with significant regional leaders; and the forthcoming visit of US President Obama himself to the region including a much-anticipated speech in Cairo are all positive, serious indications.
In addition, the content of that diplomacy indicates some positive changes, including public admonishments that Israel must stop all settlement construction in line with its obligations under the roadmap. These moves have, in turn, generated healthy debate both in Israel and among the American Jewish community on the one hand, and among Palestinians and other Arabs, on the other hand.
Optimists and pro-peace groups on both sides have been encouraged by these developments. Others warn of the serious challenges facing Obama. First, how will the new administration handle the situation in Iraq? As long as the Arab people continue to see the United States as an occupying power, there will be doubts as to whether or not these verbal and rhetorical changes can make a difference.
In addition, US friends and allies in the region are among the least democratic and popular, having failed at social and economic development. The US is perceived as the power propping up these regimes. Washington's association with these regimes and complete absence of dialogue with the rest of the Arab world will also limit the extent to which this administration can improve its image and relations.
The other serious challenge that the new administration has is to materialize its positions toward Israel. Despite the administration's clear demand for a complete halt to settlement construction, Israel is still expanding settlements, increasing the number of settlers and consolidating its occupation. These opposing positions will ultimately jeopardize Washington's credibility.
President Obama is in a unique position to make a difference in this regard. He enjoys a high level of support, not only from the American public but from the American Jewish community. In addition, he also has vast popularity overseas, which allows him to mobilize international support around the idea that Israel continues to violate the terms of reference of the peace process and the requests and expectations of its main ally--one responsible for both Israel's superiority and its existence. Ultimately, there may be a price to be paid in this relationship.
The question remains, however, whether the US president will know how, and if he indeed can.
The appointment of George Mitchell as envoy; recent active Middle East diplomacy including Washington summit meetings with significant regional leaders; and the forthcoming visit of US President Obama himself to the region including a much-anticipated speech in Cairo are all positive, serious indications.
In addition, the content of that diplomacy indicates some positive changes, including public admonishments that Israel must stop all settlement construction in line with its obligations under the roadmap. These moves have, in turn, generated healthy debate both in Israel and among the American Jewish community on the one hand, and among Palestinians and other Arabs, on the other hand.
Optimists and pro-peace groups on both sides have been encouraged by these developments. Others warn of the serious challenges facing Obama. First, how will the new administration handle the situation in Iraq? As long as the Arab people continue to see the United States as an occupying power, there will be doubts as to whether or not these verbal and rhetorical changes can make a difference.
In addition, US friends and allies in the region are among the least democratic and popular, having failed at social and economic development. The US is perceived as the power propping up these regimes. Washington's association with these regimes and complete absence of dialogue with the rest of the Arab world will also limit the extent to which this administration can improve its image and relations.
The other serious challenge that the new administration has is to materialize its positions toward Israel. Despite the administration's clear demand for a complete halt to settlement construction, Israel is still expanding settlements, increasing the number of settlers and consolidating its occupation. These opposing positions will ultimately jeopardize Washington's credibility.
President Obama is in a unique position to make a difference in this regard. He enjoys a high level of support, not only from the American public but from the American Jewish community. In addition, he also has vast popularity overseas, which allows him to mobilize international support around the idea that Israel continues to violate the terms of reference of the peace process and the requests and expectations of its main ally--one responsible for both Israel's superiority and its existence. Ultimately, there may be a price to be paid in this relationship.
