A Point of View: What Clinton's trip augurs for Israel

So what are the earliest vibes about the Obama administration's Middle East approach based on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's visit to the region?

Overall, I'd say positive, with reason for some optimism, but also with a note of caution.

Up front, candidate Obama made clear that the big break from his predecessor would be in the area of engagement.  An Obama administration would see the issues between Israel and the Arabs as a priority that required US involvement early on.  And so we are seeing it, with the appointment and visits of George Mitchell as special envoy and with this early trip of the secretary of state.

We've already seen Clinton speak on a wide range of issues - humanitarian assistance to Palestinians in Gaza, Hamas, US relations with a new Israeli government, Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority, Israeli settlements.

All in all, one can conclude that there were no major surprises here. Obama and Clinton have both said repeatedly - and it came through on this trip - that US-Israeli relations are solidly entrenched and that America's regard for Israeli security and for its democratic process are keystones to the relationship and cannot be weakened. This was reflected in very strong comments by Clinton about Israel's fundamental right to defend itself against continuing Hamas rocket attacks, the need for Hamas to radically change in order for the US to work with it and the commitment to work with whatever Israeli government emerges from the coalition conversations.

For those who argue that the depth and breadth of the US-Israel relationship are such that a change in administration won't radically affect those relations, many of Clinton's comments were a reassuring confirmation.
Still, a note of caution is in order. Her comments criticizing Israel for not fully opening the border crossings with Gaza, while focused on humanitarian assistance, could undermine Israel's efforts to set up a system to ensure that no weapons are smuggled into Gaza for Hamas.

Similarly, there is concern with regard to Israeli settlements. Let's be frank. There have been differences between the US and Israel on settlements for decades, sometimes more extreme, as during the Carter and Bush, Sr. administrations, but even during the Clinton and Bush, Jr. tenures.
And on the Israeli side, particularly in recent years when several Israeli governments, including those of Barak, Sharon and Olmert, were all committed to not increasing settlements and getting rid of illegal outposts, there still has generally not been a willingness by Israeli leadership to act because the political cost was not worth it in light of the absence of real concessions and change on the Palestinian side.

Hillary Clinton's choosing to criticize Israeli expansion of the EJ 7 settlements in a press conference with Abbas suggests there could be some difficult times ahead on this issue. How bad it gets will depend on whether the administration puts things in context: real change on the Palestinian side - on security - would make it easier for an Israeli government to act; the absence of it should make the US more cautious on the issue.

Which gets to what I think is most important for Secretary Clinton to take away from her recent trip: that the Israeli electorate, in its turn to the right, was not rejecting the peace process or even a two-state solution. Instead, they were saying out loud that the initiatives that Ehud Barak and Ariel Sharon took to further peace - the unilateral withdrawal from Lebanon, the Camp David offer for a Palestinian state and the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza - produced greater extremism rather than moderation on the other side.

As a result, future Israeli concessions will depend on evidence that next time they will produce moderation. And the only way to prove that is for the US to work with the Palestinians to ensure a different culture, where the teaching of hate, the support for terrorism, the chaos and corruption will be things of the past and that in sum, the Palestinians are finally interested in building a viable state of their own.