WarSclerotic

Just because one sparrow has been sighted doesn’t mean it’s spring. That said,  President Barack Obama’s siding with Israel over Operation Pillar of Defense flies in the face of all those who predicted he would “settle old scores” with Netanyahu if he was re-elected. While the situation in Gaza stands out compared with other issues — because Hamas is the sole culprit responsible for this escalation and because of the principled stance the U.S. and Europe have on terrorism that could be exported their way — Washington’s approach on Israel’s latest campaign bodes well for the bilateral relations down the road. While the U.S. may change its rhetoric and call for restraint on both sides if Israel expands this operation and launches a ground campaign, for now it is very likely that Washington will exert diplomatic and economic pressure on Egypt to have it restrain Hamas, rather than press Israel.

Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi’s inflammatory speech in Cairo the other day, in which he threatened Israel, at least rhetorically, could be just demagoguery that is designed to pay lip service to the radicalism in the Egyptian street and to respond to the signals of duress communicated by a frightened Hamas leadership.

But it could also be designed to secure his base and shore up his credentials should the time come and he has to meet U.S. dictates. The Egyptian regime’s actions are not just a function of the economic pressure coming from Washington, but also reflect an innate desire to maintain stability in the region and at home, both of which could be threatened by the actions of Hamas and the other jihadists in the Gaza Strip.

Policy makers in Washington have diverging, often conflicting, views on the challenges Obama will have to face in his second term. Last week, New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman wrote that the Middle East’s problems (Iran, al-Qaida, the rise of Islamists, Syria, Afghanistan and the Palestinian issue) might see “multiple, interconnected explosions.” The Washington Post’s deputy editorial page editor, Jackson Diehl, who supported Obama during his re-election bid, recently questioned Obama’s ability to rise up to the challenges in his second term.

Aaron Miller, who alongside former State Department special envoy Dennis Ross, played a major role in Arab-Israeli peace talks, sounded a similar note recently. In a recent post on the highly influential portal Politico, he said that when it comes to the Middle East the president needs “smart management rather than bold solutions … where he will most likely fail.” Miller adds that the last thing Obama needs is more pointless spats with Netanyahu that have helped no one but his rivals.

Obama knows that Netanyahu will most likely be prime minister throughout his entire second term (if the latter is re-elected in January) and that there is a good chance Washington and Jerusalem will collaborate on strategic geopolitical issues. Let’s hope this extends to the Palestinian issue as well. The two leaders will have an opportunity to display this unity in coming weeks when Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas asks the U.N. General Assembly to afford the Palestinians the status of a non-member state. The tightening of relations requires wise judgment and pro-active Israeli initiatives, as well as a constant reassessment of the concessions that the Jewish state can or cannot make. What’s important is to keep Israel’s over-arching interests in mind, rather than being singularly focused on the path taken to get to where we want.

The big question is the Iranian issue, which has become more pressing as of late in light of the controversy over the red lines for its nuclear program and the recent developments that validate the assertions Netanyahu has made in his recent speeches (and which were reinforced by the recent IAEA report).