RSS

With his famous Cairo speech, Obama attempted to reverse the increase of tensions and distrust between the U.S. and the Muslim world. After nearly one year in office, deeds have to follow those declarations of good intent. So far, there has been no "change" in the two most pressing foreign policy issues, which are the war in Afghanistan and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Regarding Israel/Palestine, the mantra of the "two state solution" appears increasingly obsolete. This can be illustrated by Obama's unsucessful attempt to force a settlement freeze on the Israeli government. Instead of making concessions, Netanyahu implemented the Shepherd Hotel proposal, which had been dormant since the 1980s, placing yet another group of extremist Jewish settlers into the heart of a Palestinian area in East Jerusalem; but this time, at the back door of the British consulate. As if this humiliation was not enough, Obama's foreign secretary dared to applaud the Israeli government for "unprecedented" attempts to contain settlements, revealing deep frictions within the administration.

There have been misconceptions about the Oslo Accords from the beginning. As Yitzhak Rabin declared in his speech to the Knesset on October 5th, 1995, Israel never intened to create a real Palestinian "state", but merely autnomomous areas inside Israel as is currently implemented unilaterally by the separation wall. The Palestinians, however, expected that the promised statehood meant a real state at least in the territories once controlled by Jordan and Egypt. From a Palestinian point of view, the 1967 green line as future state border is a big concession to Israel – while from Israel's point of view, her control of the whole area was never in question.

The current state of the "peace process" is desparate. After the Gaza and Lebanon wars, many Israelis believe that it is pointless to negotiate since ceding land will only create terror. However, from a Palestinian point of view, the Israelis were never serious in the negotiations and only relinquished control over Gaza and southern Lebanon because of the military successes of Hamas and Hezbollah. Up until now the West Bank remained relatively calm, but Mahmoud Abbas' decision not to run for another presidential term increased the likelihood that Hamas might turn this area into another small Afghanistan.

The near future might see the unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state: Javier Solana stated that the E.U. will recognise Palestine if the present negotiations fail again. As alternative, the Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erekat suggested the self-dissolution of the Palestinian Authority in favour of a one-state solution (where Israelis are the minority).

Both proposals would ultimately terminate the Oslo Accords and have the potential to push the Near East closer to another regional war. The dissolution of the Palestinian Authority would create a "South Africa in the Near East", with grave consequences for the self-understanding of Israel. It seems very unlikely that the Palestinian majority would receive Israli citizenship, because then the specific features of Israel (like the general right of Jews to immigration) could probably not persist.

The unilateral creation of a Palestinian state without any treaty with Israel is equally dangerous, because then two states might claim to be the only legal entity in the area (a situation comparable to the two German states 1949 - 1990). In any case, the Clinton peace plan and the two-states solution would be dead and the US weakened.

Already now, after countless failures of US-brokered peace deals, its credibility in the Muslim world is very weak. In the eyes of many Muslims, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the core issue of confrontation with the U.S. and the "deeper reason" for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which in their opinion are only fought to protect Israel. If Obama is serious about improving the relationship between the United States and Islam, there has to be a real, positive change in Israel/Palestine now.

Obama needs to present a clear vision of the future and acquire the authority to lead both sides in its implementation. He has to break with the Clinton legacy, which was too soft with Israel. Those who believe in and work for peace need support from fresh, bold actions by a credible U.S. president.

Dr. Bernhard Lucke is a researcher dealing with environmental and resource management at the Brandenburgische Technische Universität in Cottbus, Germany.

Related Material from the Atlantic Community:

• Julia Galaski on No We Can't: Why Israelis Don't Vote for Change
• Marco Vicenzino on Two State Solution Only Option for Israel and Obama
• Memo 15 on Middle East Peace: Back to Oslo - With Egypt