The enthusiasm of Secretary-General of the United Nations Ban Ki-moon was not sufficient to bring the Israeli government to provide the conditions of peace with the Palestinians and the establishment of their independent viable state on the territories occupied in 1967. Similarly, the statement of the Quartet on the Middle East, even if it was issued at a meeting at the ministerial level and in Ban's presence, was not sufficient to bring Benjamin Netanyahu to retract his plans to build settlements in occupied territories, which undermines even the opportunity of indirect negotiations with the Palestinian Authority, as sought by the United States. Perhaps the sudden visit of the international organization's Secretary-General to the region, in the wake of the Quartet's statement, is meant to show interest and good intentions towards the resolve to support the establishment of a Palestinian state, and to strike the iron while hot on the background of the Arab approval of indirect negotiations and the US's pressing desire to start them. It is perhaps also meant to encourage the Arabs, who will be holding their summit in one week, to continue to support and back these negotiations. Yet the problem, once again, does not lie with the Arab and Palestinian side. Rather, it resides in the ability of the Quartet on the Middle East – as a reflection of the policies of the United States, Russia, the United Nations and the European Union – to ensure obtaining from Israel that it provides the requirements of such negotiations, especially as the Quartet has denied itself any means of serious pressure on Israel, including that of returning to the Security Council. It is no secret that the administration of President Barack Obama wishes to score a point in favor of its call for indirect negotiations, after the successive slaps-in-the-face dealt by Israel to its envoys to the region, by clinging to the policy of striking at the bases of establishing a Palestinian state, such as through settlement-building. Here the US Administration is working on two tracks: The first is the abundance of reassuring messages to the Arabs and Palestinians, in order to keep them in the framework of its call for indirect negotiations. This is what has been expressed in public statements, as well as in the recent joint statement issued by the Quartet and Ban's visit. In this sense, one might consider the recent move, expressing the refusal of unilateral measures, i.e. of Israel's new settlement plans, to be directed essentially at the Arabs. The other track is that of finding a formula for a settlement with the Netanyahu government, to overcome the settlement-building crisis, especially on the eve of the Israeli Prime Minister's visit to the United States. Indeed, despite all the uproar in Washington and Tel Aviv over the acuteness of the dispute, the Administration has made up its mind in terms of avoiding any confrontation with the Jewish lobby, on the background of important political events taking place inside the US. Moreover, it has become in its interest to wrap up the dispute with the Israeli government, on the basis of this government reexamining its settlement-building plans, in a manner that would justify the US Administration's claims to have obtained concessions from it. As for the content of such reexamination, or, as has been said, compliance to US conditions, it is settlement-building without the ruckus that had accompanied announcing the latest plan in occupied Jerusalem during Vice President Joe Biden's visit. In this sense, one might come to believe that the new round of visits scheduled for Presidential Envoy George Mitchell aims at preparing for Netanyahu's visit to the United States, rather than at obtaining concessions from Israel that would provide the conditions of resuming negotiations. In other words, it aims at providing the form for the Obama Administration's reconciliation with the Netanyahu government, not at pressuring Israel to provide the Quartet's conditions for resuming negotiations and to accept its goals. Thus the pressure turns once again towards the Arabs to accept the results of the US-Israeli reconciliation and its requirements, instead of international – including American – pressure on Israel to provide the requirements of peace.
