Window on Israel: Has Obama done more harm than good - and does it matter?

This post is about some little details of international politics. For our understanding of the current situation we must rely on the media, which does not always get things right. And in any case, the media does not provide the nuances of private conversations, body language meant to decrease or increase the impact of what is said. Perhaps one can rely on the media's portrayal of events, without assuming that it is the whole truth.

The story begins with the Obama administration's efforts to jump-start a peace process between Israel and Palestine. Among the demands made of Israel, both by Secretary of State Clinton and Special Envoy Mitchell, was a total freeze on construction in settlements over the 1967 borders, including the new neighborhoods of Jerusalem.
 
There followed a series of meetings between Israelis and Americans, and turmoil within Israel. What emerged was an offer by Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu's government to freeze new construction for several months, not including Jerusalem, housing units already authorized or under construction, or public facilities in settlement areas.
 
Currently it seems the Americans recognize that this is the most they can get from Israel, and Clinton is saying that the US never demanded a total freeze as a precondition to negotiation.
 
Maybe yes, maybe no. We should not expect individuals with the kind of ego that goes with high office to admit failure.
 
Now Secretary Clinton is saying that the prime minister has offered a landmark concession.
 
But the Palestinians stopped listening at "full settlement freeze."
 
Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) is saying that he will not begin negotiations unless there is a total freeze of construction within the settlements, including the new neighborhoods of Jerusalem.
 
Netanyahu is saying that he is willing to begin negotiations without preconditions.
 
Abbas is holding to his conditions, which Palestinian officials did not demand for starting negotiations in the past. Abbas is angry at the Americans for sandbagging him.
 
So it looks as if the Obama administration has, through naivete or by overreaching, actually set back the Israel-Palestinian peace process.
 
Obama's election campaign featured an attractive collection of promises all over the board, and he has not realized any of the important ones.
 
It is too early to call him a failure. The issues he faces are politically complex and sensitive, and neither easy nor quick to address.
 
Nothing has come out of Congress on healthcare, and he may yet achieve something.
 
Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan have deteriorated. Yet it would be unfair to blame him for these regressions without pondering the actions of the Bush administration.
 
Guantanomo has proved to be more complex than he indicated.
 
The economy may be stabilizing, but here, too, is the problem of sorting out the respective contributions of the Bush and Obama administrations.
 
Getting back to the minutiae of Israel-Palestine, the question is: Does it make any difference that the Obama administration's initial steps have provided the leverage for Abbas to halt the process?
 
This is nothing more than an excuse for the whimpering Abbas. Previous efforts at negotiations have not gone well, going back to 1993 and 2000 with Yasser Arafat, and Olmert's final efforts with Abbas in 2008.
 
Abbas is traveling the world complaining about Netanyahu. Yet it is Abbas who is unwilling to show the flexibility that pragmatism demands, or is too weak to resist those demanding that Palestinians remain steadfast to their dreams. His line, repeated at every stop, is that the United Nations, the United States, or other powers must pressure Israel to give him what he wants.
 
Should we cry at the hopelessness of our neighbors? Snicker at the lameness with which they have failed at violence, bluster and begging for help? Or criticize international organizations and great powers for providing welfare and verbal support for the Palestinians, perhaps feeling that it was the right thing to do, but actually reinforcing Palestinian dependence and lack of concern for their own future?
 
All of the above.