This is one of those notes more concerned with unanswered, and perhaps unanswerable questions than with clear description or prescription.
Why the effort?
That question does have an answer.
If the questions are well defined, they should guide our thoughts in processing ongoing events.
Let me begin with the suggestion that Barack Obama is a mirror image of George W. Bush. It may be early to say that conclusively, but it is not too early to raise the possibility.
What gives rise to this is a brewing storm over the question of Jewish settlements.
Israeli officials claim that the Bush administration accepted limited construction in or near existing settlements. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says no.
The details are complex and murky. Did Israeli and American officials only discuss Israel's policy of continued building? Was there an American "wink and nod" that Israelis interpreted as an acceptance of their policy? If winks and nods are not formally recorded, have they no standing in relations between national governments?
There may be no conclusive answers to those questions.
My comparison of Obama and Bush derives from what seems to be Obama's obsession with the idea of the settlements as a key to peace in the Middle East and other problems of the United States.
It sounds to me like George W. Bush's obsession with not only punishing al Quaida and its allies for 9-11, but seeing military occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan as a way of remaking them into something like western, democratic countries.
The resemblance between Bush and Obama overrides differences in personal style and location on the political spectrum.
They grasped on to learned theories, despite slim chances that they will work. They remind me of students at quality universities with great resources, who read all their assignments but do not look out the library window at what is happening, in order to examine whether the reading is relevant.
The term "sophomoric" means students (i.e., sophomores) at the stage where they have learned something, but not enough to realize the limitations of what they are spouting.
Barack Obama is not alone, and certainly is not the first who perceives that the settlements are a key to the future of the Middle East. It is conventional to portray them as a land grab, and part of an occupation that imposes severe limits the opportunities of Palestinians. Settlers who justify themselves by shouting selective passages of the Bible do not add to their appeal among well educated politicians, technocrats, or intellectuals who are not inclined to begin their thinking with religious doctrine. Alas, those are the kinds of people often in positions of influence.
Obama is more nuanced than George W. Bush. He has said that Palestinians and other Arabs must do their share in the peace process. He recognizes the problems of extremism, and links it to Hamas. He has said that incitement of hatred is endemic to Palestinian education, media, and politics. He notes that Palestinian faults in governance are not entirely the result of Israeli occupation. He is on record as opposing Palestinian claims about refugees' right of return.
Among the unanswered questions is, How weighty in Obama's strategic planning is his insistence on a halt of all settlement activity in comparison to the weight of his demands on the Palestinians?
We should also ask a question about the posturing we have seen from Israelis. Is it necessary to risk a frontal conflict by emphasizing a quarrel with the American president? Wouldn't it be wiser to say Israel is considering an appropriate response to the president's program, and that it will come in the context of continuing conversations with Americans and Palestinians? That would mean that Israel could think of bending some of its preferences along with the Palestinians bending some of theirs.
Bibi's sophomoric syndrome is no less severe than Barack's. Moreover, Bibi's is aggravated by a lack of verbal control and poor body language.
Americans and others will not attain even a small amount of the domestic and international aspirations that Obama's rhetoric stimulates.
Bibi will not overcome the much greater power of the American president. His best hope is that the Palestinians will do something even less appropriate than what he is doing.
I welcome comments sent to my e-mail address, below.
Ira Sharkansky (Emeritus)
Department of Political Science
Hebrew University
Jerusalem, Israel
Tel: +972-2-532-2725
email: msira@mscc.huji.ac.il