Obama's Middle East Diplomacy Begins

In the course of a single day, the king of Jordan promoted a "57-state solution," in which every Arab and Muslim state from Indonesia to Mauritania would establish ties with Israel, the Israeli prime minister stood by the Egyptian president as they took turns declaring that Israel is ready and able to make peace with the Palestinians, and none other than the pope called for two "homelands," Israel and Palestine, coexisting one with the other.  

And yet, before those statements were made on Monday, the parties seemed to be as far apart as ever. Divisions between Arab countries have even led to talk of an Arab cold war. The government of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas hasn't controlled Gaza for almost two years (Hamas forcefully took control on June 14, 2007), and Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, whose previous term as prime minister is remembered for his clash with the Clinton administration, has yet to commit to the creation of a Palestinian state.    

So what's motivating these proclamations? Some point to the sea change in the U.S. image that President Barack Obama, the Christian-American son of a Muslim-African father, brought to office, and say that Middle East leaders would like to associate themselves with the popular American president in order to score points at home.

But that is not the whole picture. The Obama administration has been methodically unveiling a plan for multilateral Middle East diplomacy, which has become one of the pillars of its foreign policy thus far. This first stage has centered on engaging Middle East leaders, listening to their concerns, gauging their mood, and then enlisting their help and support. There is an implicit choice in the engagement, however: be included in America's diplomatic efforts, inform the process, and be a part of a regional alignment toward the United States, or be left out and potentially face sanctions or worse.    

Back Channel Diplomacy?

The details of President Obama's Middle East diplomacy are likely to be revealed further in a speech he will deliver in Egypt on June 4. In the meantime, the president is holding meetings with the key players whom he would like to have as partners in the process. He first met with Jordanian King Abdullah (April 21) and will next meet with Netanyahu (May 18), Hosni Mubarak (May 26), and Abbas (May 28).  

In anticipation of Monday's meeting between President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu, today's news includes reports claiming that "back channel" messages are being relayed in preparation for the meetings with President Obama.

• Roni Sofer reports in Yediot Acharonoth today that Syrian President Bashar Assad is believed to have given Jordan's King Abdullah a message to pass on to Netanyahu on the subject of restarting a Syrian-Israeli dialogue and raising its level to direct talks.

• Early this morning Binyamin Netanyahu made an unexpected visit to Amman to meet with King Abdullah.

• Aluf Benn wrote in Ha'aretz this morning that President Obama sent a message to Netanyahu through a senior American official "demanding that Israel not surprise the U.S. with an Israeli military operation against Iran."

Public Diplomacy

President Obama's starting point is that ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by creating a Palestinian state is critical to a stable Middle East. However, working with Israeli and Palestinian partners alone is insufficient. As King Abdullah put it, the conflict is "far bigger than Israelis and the Palestinians."  British Foreign Secretary David Miliband put it in even starker terms in Washington yesterday, "Palestinian statelessness is the biggest recruiting sergeant for Islamic extremism around the world."

President Obama's plan encourages his partners not only to be a part of his process, but also to engage other Middle East leaders and encourage them to play ball. According to Middle East analyst Stephen Cohen, "King Abdullah of Jordan has taken upon himself the responsibility for talking to the Arabs about Obama, and of trying to sell to them the notion that a big change can come about if they agree . . . to make their contributions."

Cohen noted that King Abdullah recently met with Syrian President Bashar Assad in Damascus (not a standard practice for the Jordanian king). At their meeting, the two leaders likely discussed Syrian support for the Arab Peace Initiative, some form of which is likely to be a recurring theme in the upcoming White House meetings, as well as a possible Israel-Syria track (and perhaps Assad's message to Netanyahu that Yediot claimed was passed by Abdullah today). According to King Abdullah, an Israel-Syria track will be one of the three main peace tracks of Obama's plan (the other two are an Israeli-Palestinian track and an Israeli-Lebanese track).

Hosni Mubarak is also emerging as a partner in Obama's Middle East plan. His role appears to be that of a mediator between the Israelis and the Palestinian Authority, as well as between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas.

But so far at least, those efforts have not yielded results. A formal Israel-Hamas cease-fire that opens Gaza's borders to food and goods or frees Gilad Shalit has yet to be brokered. Neither has a Palestinian unity government been realized, which would end the division of Palestinians between the West Bank (the Palestinian Authority) and Gaza (Hamas).  

And although both Netanyahu and Mubarak have referred to their meeting in Sharm el-Sheikh as a success, neither spoke about taking concrete steps on Gaza or any other issue.

Shimon Shiffer wrote in Yediot Acharonoth that, "Mubarak was unable to extract from Netanyahu the commitment to negotiate with the Palestinians on a state of their own. . . . On the matter of the Gaza Strip, the Egyptians want to continue talks with Hamas to stabilize the calm with Israel. Netanyahu is opposed to this.  . . . The Egyptians promised Netanyahu to handle the matter of Shalit, but made it clear that the price could not be changed: more than 450 top prisoners in Israeli jails."

There is no doubt that discussing Gaza raises a host of complications. The main one-how to deal with Hamas-has become so politically toxic both in the Middle East and in Washington that President Obama and his Middle East interlocutors might be happier if it remains behind closed doors. They would probably like the attention to stay on state leaders.

An End Game

All this leads to what many see as the main event: the Netanyahu-Obama meeting on Monday. Will that meeting produce more than a photo op? Will it publicly reveal the clash that some contend is simmering beneath the surface? Perhaps too much hype has been made one way or another.

Nonetheless, the Obama administration has made it clear that it wants to see results from all parties involved. And, if Vice President Joe Biden's speech to AIPAC is any indication, what's expected from Israel in the short term is already known: removing West Bank settler outposts, which Israel and the international community consider illegal, stopping the expansion of settlements in general, and lifting roadblocks, which impede Palestinian movement in the West Bank.

But a re-commitment to confidence-building measures alone will not be enough. The administration's multi-party, multi-track diplomacy signals that what they are looking for is a U.S.-led comprehensive deal with a clear end goal-not a process, but a solution.