Better times ahead?

Once again US President Barack Obama missed a golden opportunity last week to castigate Israel for its loud criticism of his achievement in negotiating a preliminary agreement with Iran to derail its nuclear ambitions, which he described as “once in a lifetime opportunity”.

In an exclusive interview with Thomas L. Friedman, a columnist for The New York Times, Obama said: “This is our best bet by far to make sure Iran doesn’t get a nuclear weapon.”

But Obama’s position towards Israel figured prominently in the interview, especially that he was labelled as “anti-Israel” by some Israelis and American congressmen, particularly Republicans running for Congress next year, who have been receiving sizeable donations.

He told Friedman: “This is an area that I’ve been concerned about… Look, Israel is a robust, rowdy democracy…. We share so much. We share blood, family…. And part of what has always made the US-Israeli relationship so special is that it has transcended party, and I think that has to be preserved.

“There has to be the ability for me to disagree with a policy on settlements, for example, without being viewed as opposing Israel. There has to be a way for Prime Minister Netanyahu to disagree with me on policy without being viewed as anti-Democrat, and I think the right way to do it is to recognise that as many commonalities as we have, there are going to be strategic differences.

“But this has been as hard as anything I do because of the deep affinities that I feel for the Israeli people and for the Jewish people. It’s been a hard period.”

That was the only reference to the Palestinian conflict in the interview, regrettably.

He could have decried the continued illegal Israel expansion in the occupied West Bank and the mistreatment of Palestinians still living in their usurped homeland.

Or the plight of the residents of the Gaza Strip, who are suffering immensely since Israel continues to besiege the nearly 2 million Palestinians there.

In fairness to Obama, in a radio interview this week he said that he had rejected a call by Israel to make any nuclear agreement with Iran conditional on Tehran’s recognition of the Israel’s right to exist.

But had Obama called on the Israelis to resume peace talks with the Palestinians, an urgent step since Netanyahu has recently declared that he does not expect a state of Palestine during his current term in office, would have been much more appreciated in the Arab world.

The Palestinians are now reportedly planning serious measures prompted by Israel’s continued occupation and the failure of any noteworthy international step to take action.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas last week threatened to turn to the International Criminal Court (ICC) over Israel’s refusal to release the hundreds of millions of dollars in tax money owed the Palestinian Authority (PA).

In response to Western pressure, Israel gave part of the funds, a step that was rejected by the Palestinians.

Additionally, Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad Al Maliki revealed that the PA leadership has been in touch with the office of the ICC prosecutor to inquire about documents and information that would accelerate the investigation into Israel’s ”war crimes”.

He explained that the court “won’t focus only on the last Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip, but would look into all what it considers as a war crime or a crime against humanity”.

Palestine became a member of the court on June 13 last year.

Another Palestinian front is now under consideration, as revealed by the Palestinian ambassador to the UN, Riyad Mansour, to see whether the UN Security Council has “the political will” to adopt a resolution that will set a deadline for ending Israel’s occupation and establishing a Palestinian state.

France is on record as saying it will propose a council resolution in the coming weeks with a framework for negotiations towards resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Obama, too, has promised to reassess the US policy towards Israel following Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent statement that he would not allow the establishment of a Palestinian state on his watch.

“That could be a possible sign that Washington would no longer shield Israel in the UN Security Council,” a senior Palestinian diplomat reportedly said.

A settlement regarding the Iranian nuclear programme and a “Palestinian state” give hope that the Middle East may once again be on the top of the international agenda if the religious militancy in the regional subsides.

The writer is a Washington-based columnist.