Blogs and Stories
How Obama Lost the Middle East
Ron Sachs / Getty Images
With the Palestinian leadership threatening to walk, Walter Russell Mead breaks down the president’s mistakes—and how we can get the peace process going again.
The Obama administration’s attempt to relaunch the Middle East peace process isn’t just dead. The decomposing corpse is stinking up the room. The president’s personal prestige has been dinged—in the Arab world, in Israel, and in Europe and beyond. He has undercut his core strategy of reaching out to the Arab and Muslim world by showing a new, more “even-handed” American policy in this bitter dispute.
There was nothing more predictable than this embarrassing and damaging public flop. The administration dug a hole for itself and jumped merrily in.
Four things went wrong, one after the other.
First, Obama made what Arabs heard as a promise: that he was going to get Israel to stop all construction in all settlements in both the West Bank and East Jerusalem. This was rash and wrong; there is no way the Israeli government would accept this condition of its own free will—and Obama lacks the power to force this deal down Israel’s throat. Second, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu refused to cash the check Obama rashly wrote. He declined to accept the full construction freeze that the president wanted. Third, the Arab world then refused to help Obama by making some concessions to Israel in exchange for the partial freeze Israel proposed. Finally, in those conditions, Muhammad Abbas, a weak leader of an even weaker proto-state (the Palestinian Authority), threatened to throw in the towel, saying that he can’t carry on anymore under these conditions.
The administration’s initial mistake was easy to make. Almost everyone underestimates the ability of small powers to blow off their larger, more powerful allies—and to get away with it scot-free. Look at Karzai in Afghanistan, or Maliki in Iraq. Without American troops and American money, both these guys would be living in exile paying through the nose for security guards; as it is, both men thumb their noses at American diplomats whenever it suits them. Even tiny little Honduras handed Obama his hat, rejecting his well-intentioned though poorly designed compromise.
It’s not just Americans who can’t keep their Mini-Me allies in line. Eight hundred thousand Greek Cypriots gave the other 26 member states of the European Union the raspberry when they rejected a solution to the Cyprus crisis blessed by Turkey, Greece, and the EU in 2004. Isolated, starving North Korea defies China—its only friend and protector—whenever it wakes up on the wrong side of the bed. Zimbabwe scoffs at South African pressure; Bolivia yanks Brazil’s chain.
“I will shake my little finger and Tito will fall,” said Joe Stalin in 1948. Stalin shook fingers and his fists and he stamped his feet; he screamed and he sanctioned and tried everything he could think of, but Tito still ruled Belgrade 30 years after Stalin died.
Not only did the administration fail to take note of this general fact in international life; it ignored the special case of American-Israeli relations. American public opinion strongly prefers a pro-Israel foreign policy to any other available option; mindful of this, Congress just isn’t going to let an American president do anything drastic. Israeli prime ministers read the opinion polls. They know the rules of the game.
• Leslie H. Gelb: McChrystal’s Fuzzy Math
• Haroun Mir: The Only Way to Avoid Chaos in AfghanistanThere was simply no way that under these conditions President Obama was going to push Bibi farther than Bibi wanted to go. (The one thing Obama might have used as a bribe—a firm promise to attack Iran or at least help Israel get the job done—was, one assumes, off the table.)
Now Arabs—and Europeans—look at Obama’s failure to extract a complete construction freeze from Netanyahu and they jump to one of two possible conclusions: The American president must be either cynical or weak. Either he was cynically trying to court the Arabs, yet again, with more empty promises and empty words, or he sincerely wants Israel to stop all settlement activity, but is too weak to deliver.
The Right Dumps Carrie
Jacob Bernstein is a senior reporter at The Daily Beast. Previously, he was a features writer at WWD and W Magazine. He has also written for New York magazine, Paper, and The Huffington Post.
What's Joe's Problem?
Lloyd Grove is editor at large for The Daily Beast. He is also a frequent contributor to New York magazine and was a contributing editor for Condé Nast Portfolio. He wrote a gossip column for the New York Daily News from 2003 to 2006. Prior to that, he wrote the Reliable Source column for the Washington Post, where he spent 23 years covering politics, the media, and other subjects.
Geithner's Stock Plummeting
Jeff Madrick is a contributor to the New York Review of Books and a former economics columnist for the New York Times. He is editor of Challenge Magazine, visiting professor of humanities at Cooper Union, and senior fellow at the New School's Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis. He is the author of Taking America, The End of Affluence (Random House) and The Case for Big Government.
In Bed with Warlords
Mead is the Henry A. Kissinger Senior Fellow for U.S. Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations and the author of God and Gold: Britain, America, and the Making of the Modern World. He writes a blog at The American Interest.
What's Wrong With Winning?
Mead is the Henry A. Kissinger Senior Fellow for U.S. Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations and the author of God and Gold: Britain, America, and the Making of the Modern World. He writes a blog at The American Interest.
An amateur President who doesn't comprehend the complexity of international relations, and is too lazy or arrogant to learn. Likewise, his staff of novice girls and boys are more concerned with the DC social scene than concentrating on their jobs. This will end very very badly.
OldCrow - Your post was hilarious. I will use it in class today (I teach 12th grade Social Sciences) as a perfect example of the type of "empty rhetoric" that has become epidemic in political discourse. By empty rhetoric, I refer to emotional opinions that lack any substance or validation. Thanks. Keep it up.
If this post is an example of your teachings I would suggest a new career. As an educator you should know that there are no opinions save the emotional however diversified. The problem with Social Science is and has always been that the teacher attempts to give more of those opinions than actually teach. It is fairly evident that you are one of those.
crypto, have you never heard of "well-informed opinions"--those with facts to support them--as opposed to "uninformed opinions", such as OldCrow's? Not all opinions are of equal credibility and value. Teaching involves more than reciting facts, but also formulating opinions about patterns of facts, to understand larger influences. The better supported by the facts those opinions are, the more valid. Bergs' point is extremely valid, and it's surprising you can't understand it.
OldCrow is just venting a bit...certainly not understanding the complexities of the Middle East and being oblivious to the ramifications of making an important speech that unjustifiably raised expectations was impulsive...perhaps tinged with arrogance.
Perhaps when your killing time bashing in class today you might incidentally tackle that Obama speech and actually let your students take it apart paragraph by paragraph. Then ask them to size up those eloquent good intentions against the real world dirty jobs of trade offs and earning real trust that get things done. Heres one! Empty rhetoric...grandstanding speeches that pander to groups that can't or won't make concessions to heal their lands.
RDBergs. Yes, I agree with your assessment of OldCrow's posting. However, how does yours differ? Please offer you students education by example, not by rhetoric and mandate. We all know this is how people learn. It's a heartfelt request, not a criticism for its own sake.
I'm sure you have more to offer. Please take this opportunity to do so.
Best regards,
e.
Ohh, Yes why did Obama "fix" the Middle East like Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and W did? They all managed to solve this equation in their first year without much issue, but Obama not so much.
What exactly is Obama NOT responsible for. So far its the Global Climate, World Peace, and Thanksgiving Turkey in every American Oven.
As soon as Obama took the oath of office he became responsible for everything. The United States is a continuous entity and its president a representative of that continuity. Like all presidential candidates, Obama claimed that his ideas would be more effective than the guy before him - it's perfectly reasonable to question if he can live up to those claims.
Pennsykid: I understood Bergs perfectly. While I had no intention of siding with Crow, if you will, I do have a Masters in Education. I stand by my comments.
To the people like Mr. Mead and the posters who've made an obsession out of criticizing the President every 5 minutes:
I would love to see the consequences in your lives after criticizing your boss, significant other, auto mechanic, and mother, every 5 minutes to their faces.
But you can't, so you come here because you refuse to realize you're powerless over people, places, and things.
Put an 'old' in front of 'boys' and you could be talking about the last administration.
"American public opinion strongly prefers a pro-Israel foreign policy to any other available option"
Speak for yourself...
Gaza has turned into a 'Warsaw Ghetto' with the US's tacit approval. Who are you joking?
Have you ever been to the Warsaw Ghetto?
Or, for that matter, to Gaza?
If not, you should refrain from making such comparisons.
I think the 2008 election is pretty clear evidence that the author is right. One whif of a pro-Palestinian position and Obama had to immediately back-peddle and re-affirm he was a "friend to Israel" about 30 million times.
Israel has no credibility in the Middle east, the only country that tolerates Israel is the United States. The Palestinians do not have as much credibility because they cannot control the radicals, and they cannot control Gaza. But that is also what happens when you divide a country into 2. It is Israel's best interest to keep the 2 states divided and unbalance. Israel is a bully, and they are lucky they have the Guns to back it up, and a bigger brother watching over their backs. But according to this Writer, everyone is weak and on the wrong. Only the Israelis are on the Right...
israel is bully? the reason they have guns to back it up is because the surrounding nations declared war on them the day they were created in 1948.
the israelis are severely outnumbered, and they have been threatened with annihilation on a daily basis. if the palestinian leadership were more worried about their citizens well being than they were with buying weapons from iran, everyone would be better off.
i think it is time to walk away from the middle east and that inclides isreal and let them settle their own differences and stop some of those people from coming over here they talk about building a fence i say turn those planes around
and this might not be politically correct but if anyone has noticed there are an awful lot of people with foreign accents sitting up on t.v telling what the u.s needs to do why do we have so many foreigners telling theis country what to do and why are these journalists actually amening what they say this is the part that might kill me but is tina brown a citizen
This is kind of a hilarious article - 3 pages listing the wrongs we've all known about since the beginning of the problem, and the half-line conclusion that Obama needs "to develop workable and dignified solutions." I wish I could get paid to come up with conclusions like that.
Um we basically fund Israel's security I say we pull the funding and bulldoze the settlements ourselves.
I mean we are the only country really going to bat for Israel I say that gives us more than enough leverage.
you'd think... but this 1.6% of your population begs to differ...
a 1.6% that has somehow managed to equate American freedom and patriotism with support of Israel. They are just damn good...
Mr. Mead fails to note that the Middle East was "lost" many years before Obama took office. He also fails to note that neither side has a great interest in settling their differences. Until they both decide to make peace, it won't happen.
Maybe we should tell both sides that we are washing our hands of them and withdraw our financial aid. They can either kill each other, or make peace their choice.
I wasn't aware president had "found" mideast "peace road", as has no president yet nor do i expect will. You got one point of "western society" (israel) amidst a sea of arabs who are otherwise socialized and don't get along unless they got that point to focus on, even then they can't together mount a successful war according to their own desires. Maybe israel wouldn't be any more together if they didn't have the arab sea surrounding them. Someone had a dark sense of humor, or no foresight, plopping the jewish diaspora amidst their rival "cousins" in the last century after ww 2. Now, with so many jewish people having come to little israel, and with the arabs so adept at raising large families, there is a real thick stew brewing daily. If anyone can wave this closer to utopia, they good because people are stubborn and adapt to daily increments of "things getting worse" while retaining said stubbornness until some big match is struck.
Give it time. The rest of the world is positively affected by Obama's righteous path of including both adversaries equally in negotiations, rather than continuing the past practice of bullying people into submission. The Israelis have a stubborn and greedy streak in their settlement practices; the Palestinians have been oppressed so long, they too are mistrustful of discussions. The West created this problem after WWII. If both sides are acting stupid and retrenching, it won't last forever. Eventually they will see they are shooting themselves in the foot.
Ever since the Camp David Accords, through the Oslo treaty, up until today, the three conditions for Israel to have peace have been agreed upon by all parties, just not implemented: 1) Dismantle all West Bank settlements, 2) Return to pre-1967 borders, 3) Mutual recognition by both parties of a two-state solution.
Israel refuses to do any of these (though it has agreed in writing to do so in order to get US largess). Therefore Israel simply does not want peace.
It's time for the US to totally disengage from what is really just a local mini-war and let the chips fall where they may.
$10B per year in US aid to Israel is all that is keeping their little country afloat. Without that the country would be an economic basket case. That money could be much better used at home.
Conditions for Israel to have peace?? I thought peace was a two sided equation. In fact, that has been the problem all along. For decades the Palestinians have waited for western governments to do what they needed to accomplish themselves....self sufficiency and a willingness to accomodate a much stronger power to achieve their people's ends. Instead..the Palestinian leadership has consistently played the terrorist/Western sympathy cards and quite incorrectly thought Israel would cave in to either or both.
There are post 1967 borders because Arabs keep believe they can out muscle the Jews and bet on war outcomes to change borders..when they lose..and they ALWAYS lose!...they want to go back to square one.
Let's hear what the Palestinians have to offer for a change...the United States has NO strategic interest in doing anything to solve this penny ante groups problems. As for money...the Palestinian leadership has pilfered and stolen at least as much as the Israelis have received over the years..and given the US and other nations ZERO in return...except, of course, an attitude of entitlement and self importance.
Stature to reboot? Only 4 % of Israelis think he is a friend of Israel.
The idea is good but, we could also stop giving billions in aid to Israel every year. Stop the settlements or no more money!
Another idea: get the hell out of the Middle East altogether. Tell them to call us when they get serious about peace.
obama is the first president to refer to the israelis as "occupiers". he has bent over backwards to placate the muslims even as they laugh at his naivete. he is clearly on the side of the palestinians and their iranian sponsors. he can't even admit that ft hood was a terrorist attack. this guy is no friend of israel and bibi knows that. bibi is so far above bo intellectually. obama needs to just stop and become the lame duck already until we can kick him out asap.
Interesting article..I'm not sure Obama is view as either weak or cynical...it's much worse than that! He's seen as impulsive and impatient on one side of the coin..and on the other as unable to take decisive action..as opposed to hopeful rhetoric. A very unproductive and geopolitically dangerous two sided coin.
The Israeli's will use his impulsiveness to teach him a critical object lesson..on their home turf they call the shots. The Iranians will use his impatience for acquiescence and turn it around to bite his hopeful speech making in the butt. The wild card here? The Israelis..they will make the decision on Iran..and my guess is that Netanyahu and Barak have ALREADY told Obama as much in their not so secret meeting this week.
These are not problems that are handled by making phone calls to City Hall in Chicago or trading chits overs lunch near the Lake.
The right to exist, the right to self defense,and the right to protect its borders from those who claim a right of return, are not negotiable.
The Arab league never had any viable ideas except the resurgence of an Islamic crusade against Western empires.
What's your point? What is Obama's point except to mediate with religious fanatics who refuse to enter the eighth century,let alone the twenty-first.
Unfortunately the resolution of the Israel/Paletine problem - a running sore on international relations for decades - is key to a whole host of problems. Previous Presidents have allowed the little Israeli terrier to wag the huge American bloodhound - with disastrous consequences not just for the US and the West but Russia and China too. Indeed Israel's mistaken policies have already proved gravely detrimental to Israel.
The appalling treatment by the Israeli occupier of what's left of Palestine for the Palestinians is the most effective recruiting serjeant for Al Qaeda and Islamic terrorism generally. Had Bush and Blair not gone into Iraq but had coupled the invasion of Afghanistan with some real move to resolving Israel/Palestine we would not now have those two "Vietnams" to deal with.
This article is right about one thing - the need to internationalise Israel/Palestine. Already there is the Quartet but Europe, the UN and Russia simply followed US timidity vin kow-towing to an extremist Israel.
What's needed now is political determination from the outside world to give the Obama Adminstration the backbone it needs to bring to bear the vast pressure it can on Israel. It must be obliged to take the first step and stop the takeover in Jerusalem and the West Bank. Israeli illegal incursions in occupied Palestine is what led to Palestinian hopelessness, hatred and the pathetic violence they have been able to mount. Even Israel's friends were taken aback by Israel's monstrous destruction in Lebanon and Gaza.
Obama's presidency may well come to be judged by two things - did he get a real public option on health care - and so show that he can stand up to the plutocracy that all but governs America? And did he finally stand up to tiny Israel's extremist leaders over the West Bank settlements and East Jerusalem?
The world must help him. The Israel lobby in Congress and the media is entrenched, and Mossad influence on the Pentagon and the CIA is pervasive. Only the outside world which so badly needs a settlement, can tip the balance for Obama enough to enable him to stand up to these hindrances.
The Palestine problem must be genuinely internationalised in a determined diplomatic campaign. But can Europe - which knows the problem well - summon the political will with Russia to mount such an imaginitive campaign? It is in resolving Israel/Palestine rather than fighting in Afghanistan, Iraq or Pakistan that security for the West - and much of the rest of the world can best be won. .
Who writes these headlines? They must have taken their lead from Politico and Huffpo.....terribly misleading.
The Middle East is not Obama's or ours to win or lose.
The Middle East is what it is. And it's got even dumber people living there than in the US. And that's saying a lot.
For Heaven's Sake, the world needs to find alternative fuel sources and get the hell out of the Middle East forever.
Obama needs to come out openly in support of the Saudi peace plan. Many, if not most, Palestinians will choose compensation rather than returning to Palestine. Israel must get back in the box (June 1, 1967 borders).
I think we should forcibly evacuate the Middle East and turn it into a nature preserve. If the current inhabitants insist on arguing and fighting over it, much like children unable to share, then no one gets the land.
The Author-term used lightly- is rationalizing the wants of the Israeli position...Abbas uses resignation like BiBi uses counterfit sabre rattling..The problem is tha tObama is not playing ..it was hclinton who steeped in it..The Meeting Tuesday shows have Obama will handle stonewalling unresponsive leaders in the process...No limo, no pressor, no photo opt! Just hear me BiBi---"It is time to come to the table for real! Call me when you are ready!" Lets see what biBi can do with that!
I agree with James Baker. Walk away from this Middle East mess and let them continue killing each other. When they are ready to get serious about making a peace deal maybe we can help. And stop giving Israel multi-millions in arms so that they can massacre poor displaced people.
Leave them alone both without a cent and you will soon see how things will change dramatically. Unfortunately the AIPAC stranglehold on Amercian politics makes any realistec move along these lines not posible. Israel - the fifty first state as we say in England will not be content until it gobles up all the land in the area in can at American expense politically in the region.
The president's mistakes? The president's mistakes?? You're an unbelievable idiot. The only mistake is for us to get involved in any way with this bunch of psychopaths. If the Israelis and Palestinians want to kill each other, let them. Get a real job, Walter.
BOKO
Netenyahu has shown himself in the past to be not trustworthy just like Arafat
There will never be progress as long as he is PM
As long as both political parties keep trying to one up each other pandering to Israel for domestic political reasons and being afraid of the anti-semitism political card the US will never be seen as a neutral party with credibility in the Arab world or for that matter Europe
Oh and yes cut off the foreign aid to an affluent country which is nothing more than a back door subsidy to US military contactors
obama is losing America, check his polls.
he must be doing something right then
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.