It certainly is worthy of praise the efforts that President Obama has set forth for the reconciliation of the Middle East peace process. Though at one point in time the efforts were meagerly comprised of words and promises, it is commendable that those words have taken shape given the hefty Pro-Jewish American ideology. President Obama is to be applauded for identifying the Israeli-Palestinian dispute as a key foreign policy priority and his stepped up efforts.
Nonetheless, as rightly identified, the mammoth task of comprising and settling the debate for ‘settlement freeze’ is the first and the primary head stone in the peace reviving efforts. Both, Netenyahu and Abbas, have concreted a stern stance on their objectives and persuading the men to sit in the same room constitutes a kind of breakthrough.
It is evident that this time round President Obama has sided with the Palestinians; favoring their stance on settlement freeze, and views it essential for the peace process to advance. This is where the challenge steps in. He has already made glimpses for his support towards the Palestinians and promised to ‘… make right the wrongs’ and issued blunt warnings to Jerusalem to halt its illegal settlement activity in the occupied West Bank (land designated for the Palestinians by the UN Charter) saying “…(it) undermines efforts to achieve peace”. Provided the strong and fortified Israeli lobby within the US administration, his going might get tougher as he might not only receive criticism from within but also from the European allies of Israel.
The question for Obama is how long he can go without having something tangible to show for his engagement. Arab states have balked at making gestures of normalisation towards Israel as long as there is no movement on the settlement front - an issue of enormous symbolic significance that is seen as a test of Israel's good intentions.
Nonetheless, as rightly identified, the mammoth task of comprising and settling the debate for ‘settlement freeze’ is the first and the primary head stone in the peace reviving efforts. Both, Netenyahu and Abbas, have concreted a stern stance on their objectives and persuading the men to sit in the same room constitutes a kind of breakthrough.
It is evident that this time round President Obama has sided with the Palestinians; favoring their stance on settlement freeze, and views it essential for the peace process to advance. This is where the challenge steps in. He has already made glimpses for his support towards the Palestinians and promised to ‘… make right the wrongs’ and issued blunt warnings to Jerusalem to halt its illegal settlement activity in the occupied West Bank (land designated for the Palestinians by the UN Charter) saying “…(it) undermines efforts to achieve peace”. Provided the strong and fortified Israeli lobby within the US administration, his going might get tougher as he might not only receive criticism from within but also from the European allies of Israel.
The question for Obama is how long he can go without having something tangible to show for his engagement. Arab states have balked at making gestures of normalisation towards Israel as long as there is no movement on the settlement front - an issue of enormous symbolic significance that is seen as a test of Israel's good intentions.
