Will he or will he not? US media is debating whether Barack Obama will go ahead with his trip to Israel, his first as president, in case Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu fails to cobble up a coalition before the March 16 deadline. Speculation in Israeli media revolves around the composition of the next cabinet and the possible partners in the coalition. Meanwhile, reports say that in Tel Aviv, Obama and Israeli leaders would consult on efforts to revive peace talks with the Palestinians. But nobody in the Middle East is betting on Obama doing anything to help restart the stalled peace talks. They know how the hopes rekindled by his Cairo speech about a new beginning in the region and a fresh approach toward the Muslim world have remained just that — hopes. They know how the new president lost his nerve in his first confrontation with Netanyahu over the expansion of Jewish settlements in Palestinian territories. At one time Israeli leaders used to say settlements are not the problem, but the “infrastructure of terror”. Now the problem is Iran's nuclear ambitions, as President Shimon Peres told EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso in Brussels last week. The real problem, as everybody including Peres know only too well, is the infrastructure of occupation. That is Israel's reluctance to vacate territories where Palestinians hope to build their own state. This state will be based on 1967 borders with mutually agreed-upon land swaps similar in size and quality. This is the essence of the two-state solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict accepted by all — Arab states as well Western powers. Israel accepts the two-state solution in principle and does everything in its power to destroy the chances of a viable Palestinian state. The US too accepts the two-state solution in principle and does nothing to stop Israelis building illegal settlements and other facts on the ground, though it has all the powers. Israel and its friends are making a grievous mistake if they think things can go on like this without Palestinian territories imploding. Palestinians are restive. They know President Mahmoud Abbas' moderation is costing them more and more lands. They know that the more their leaders tilt toward nonviolence and diplomacy, the more Israel responds with expansion of settlements, restrictions on Palestinians' movements and violence against them. They know all peace frameworks like Madrid, Oslo and “road map” have only enabled Israel to tighten its grip on Palestinian territories under sweet-sounding names. Meanwhile, time is running out. Israel can't have it both ways. A Palestinian state may not be palatable to Israel but the alternative can be worse: One state with equal rights for Jews and non-Jews. With all the cleverness Israel leaders are capable of and with all the backing Washington can give them, Israel can't postpone the inevitable. In case Obama visits Israel as scheduled, he would be doing a great service to Israelis if he does some plain speaking to Netanyahu and his colleagues. Obama's US critics say he campaigned in poetry and ruled in prose. When it comes to Middle East peacemaking, what is needed is not rhetorical elegance, but a willingness to use harsh words in verse or prose, whether a US president holds his public address in the Knesset or at the International Convention Center in Jerusalem.
