By The Daily Star Wednesday,
November 12, 2008
Editorial
Barack Obama has already been hailed as a savior who will achieve peace in the Middle East by correcting US foreign policy - and written off as phony who will simply repackage the same old pro-Israeli positions and actually make matters worse by dashing the hopes of so many people. The man will not take possession of the Oval Office for more than two whole months, and already a key chapter of his legacy is being written. This is hardly the way to prepare for what Obama has promised, an early and sustained effort to revive the Palestinian-Israeli peace process, even and perhaps especially if one suspects the entire enterprise will be a ruse.
For the past eight years, George W. Bush and his disastrously incompetent administration have been effectively disengaged from the Middle East unless one counts their efforts to impose their will by killing people and breaking things (including sovereign governments, at least one of which was freely and fairly elected). The forthcoming era is going to be different on several levels. Obama has invested a considerable amount of his credibility in peace, so he will have no choice but to try. In addition, he has repeatedly stated that unlike his predecessor, he will not attempt to wish opponents of US policies away by sticking his head in the sand.
This point is particularly important because it addresses a key reason for the Bush administration's (possibly deliberate) failure to help forge Arab-Israeli peace: They refused to coordinate with some of the very people whose participation was a prerequisite for success.
For the most part, it is neither the shape nor the substance of an eventual agreement that has stalled the peace process, because the basics of these have been known for years. The major stumbling block has been a mutual lack of confidence on the part of the principals that either of them can or will honor the bargain. It is here where the Bush administration inflicted its greatest damage. It gave the Palestinians no choice but to be suspicious by refusing to demand civilized behavior of the Israelis. It also played into the hands of Israeli war- and fear-mongers by refusing to interact with several key indigenous players, some of them governments and non-state actors with obvious and unquestionable stakes in the region's future, giving them no reason to support the peace process - but several powerful motivations to hobble it. In addition, Bush was hideously successful in subjugating the good offices of other outside participants - Russia, the European Union and the United Nations - to his own dysfunctional approach, preventing them from making any headway either.
A lot has changed. The White House will soon be occupied by an intellectual, one who reads his own newspapers and who can therefore be expected to form at least some his own opinions rather than having them spoon-fed to him to by ideologues and religious fanatics. Russia is no longer an economic basket-case incapable of exerting great-power influence. Both the EU and the UN are sick and tired of being ordered around - but highly enthusiastic about a new partnership with an America that wants to lead, not impose. Would-be matchmakers like Iran and Syria have repeatedly expressed interest in comprehensive solutions to the region's problems. Finally, the Palestinian and Israeli publics are exasperated, a condition not always conducive to peace but one often amenable to sharp changes of direction.
Much of the region is in transition, affording a rare opportunity to cure some of its chronic illnesses - not by killing the patient, as Bush almost did, but mostly by paying attention to it. Obama has already made history just by getting elected in spite of his middle name and the color of his skin. If he really wants to make a mark, he will make the search for a fair peace in the Middle East a hallmark of his presidency. If he does that, we should help him.
