By hosting tomorrow’s meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in New York, US President Barack Obama is taking a gamble. Obama has set the renewal of Palestinian-Israeli peace talks as a major goal of his presidency, but there is no evidence that the tripartite meeting, to be held on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, will bear fruit. Neither Obama nor his Middle East envoy George Mitchell has been able to bridge the wide gaps between Palestinians and Israelis. In his latest foray into the Middle East and try as he might, Mitchell got nowhere with Netanyahu after meeting him four times, as opposed to twice with Abbas. The result is that no official announcement is expected at the meeting, and that is risky. Any resumption of talks between Palestinians and Israelis without first agreeing to the outlines of a prospective final peace agreement would not only be premature but dangerous. There is great risk in entering into talks just to get a process going. Another dead end will serve only to remind Palestinians of the myriad of failed initiatives and the public no longer has the stomach for talks for the sake of talks.
Settlement expansion has become the key dispute. As there is not let up in the Israeli tenders and bids for hundreds more homes in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, it appears unlikely that Netanyahu will change his mind about more settlements and the US appears unable to do anything about it. Washington will not impose a solution; instead, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will try to “persuade, cajole, and encourage”.
Should the Palestinian leadership be pressured into a peace process that is not preceded by a complete cessation of Israeli settlement construction in all occupied territories, this will undermine the leadership in the eyes of the Palestinian public and provide more ammunition to those opposed to peaceful negotiations as a means of resolving the conflict.
American failure to pressure Israel is increasingly frustrating an Arab public that dreads a repetition of the futile peacemaking efforts that characterized the Bush administration. The Bush administration neglected the peace process; Obama said he would revive it. But whatever credibility Obama acquired following his landmark speech in Cairo in June is quickly evaporating as his administration looks set to reproduce the failures of its predecessor. Tomorrow’s meeting may be meant to show that Obama is not Bush and to demonstrate his personal commitment to making progress. Unfortunately the good intentions of the White House are simply not good enough.
As late as Friday a trilateral meeting was in doubt because of the gaps not bridged. The speed with which the meeting has now been called is not because any weekend breakthrough has been made; it is a desperate attempt by Obama to keep peace hopes alive and to save some face following his inability to lay the groundwork for renewed negotiations on Mideast peace. Mitchell would rather interpret tomorrow’s hastily called meeting as another sign of Obama’s commitment to a comprehensive peace but a trio of smiles all round will fool no one and will in no way suffice. The meeting will take place as a courtesy to Obama but without the terms of negotiations set beforehand, this is a high-risk, high-stakes encounter better not to be held at this precarious time.
