Obama in the Peace Process

The improbability of comprehensive peace between Israel and Palestine

For decades peace between Israel and the Palestinians has been an elusive goal of American foreign policy. Every president since Truman has pledged resolution of the conflict, and all have failed. At his inauguration, President Obama proclaimed his hope to “usher in a new era of peace.” Yet given the chilly U.S.-Israeli relationship that has developed over the past two years, that achievement seems further away than ever before.
America nonetheless has an important role to play in the peace process. While comprehensive negotiation has been largely fruitless, and there is no definitive roadmap to peace, there remain several points on which America can help Israel and the Palestinians come to an agreement. Moreover, by continuing to engage in the peace process, the United States opens both sides up to the possibility of unexpected congruence. President Obama is unlikely to foster a permanent peace during his term in office, but he can achieve steps in the right direction.
Obama’s Continuing Policy
Over the past two years, President Obama has grappled with America’s position in the Middle East. In a 2008 speech to AIPAC, a prominent pro-Israel organization, candidate Obama said that Jerusalem should remain the undivided capital of Israel. After his election, however, he suggested that the status of Jerusalem should be decided in negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, and he has come out strongly against Israeli settlements in the West Bank.
Compared with his predecessors, however, Obama’s stances offer as much continuity as change. Khaled Elgindy, a fellow at the Brookings Institution, told the HPR, “There are no differences between Obama’s policy towards this issue and past presidents.  It is simply a difference in nuance and tone, rather than substance.” Elgindy points to continued efforts to engage Fatah and isolate Hamas as proof that Obama has maintained many historic American policies. Nonetheless, perceptions of a radical shift have cost Obama support among Israelis. A March poll by The Jerusalem Post found that only 9 percent of Jewish Israelis thought Obama was pro-Israel, while 49 percent considered him pro-Palestinian.
The Duty to Negotiate
Public opinion polls notwithstanding, President Obama still enjoys a substantial connection to the peace process. As Elgindy said, “The United States has to play a role in the process. Otherwise the process cannot succeed.” As former Israeli Minister of the Interior Ophir Pines-Paz told the HPR, “America is the most important country in the world. They will always have a role.”
Moreover, American inducement for peace talks may yield benefits, regardless of the outcome. Pines-Paz praised negotiations for their ability to identify common ground between parties, even if a final agreement proves elusive. Harvard professor of Middle East history Roger Owen echoed this sentiment. “It is unclear exactly what progress can be made by President Obama during his term in office,” he said. “But the United States must play a role in facilitating peace regardless.”
Peace-broker or Peace-maker?
America’s efforts to broker a peace may yet pay dividends. Experts often point to Jimmy Carter’s facilitation of the 1978 Camp David Accords as proof that personal outreach can result in positive outcomes. Pines-Paz agreed that “Carter deserves a lot of credit for his success.” Nevertheless, Obama may find himself constrained by his lack of rapport with the Israeli people, as well as by the difficulties of American domestic politics. Asked whether Obama would be able to make progress, Elgindy responded, “It is hard to know, but at this point it does not look too promising.”
Whether or not Obama can facilitate lasting peace, however, the president can help both sides take positive steps in that direction. As Owen pointed out, there are parts of Jerusalem that are not disputed, and they could provide grounds for a partial agreement. While final settlement may prove elusive, the United States may able to broker a division of the uncontested territories, which would provide a natural springboard for more comprehensive discussions. President Obama may not be able to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict once and for all, but America may have a role in getting the conversation started.
Thomas Gaudett ’14 is a Staff Writer.