This was absolutely inevitable. Some members of Congress who are sympathetic to the Israeli settler movement and/or overly skeptical of Palestinian intentions, and therefore unenthusiastic about serious efforts to reach a peace agreement in the Middle East, have begun to push back against President Obama. The Politico cites two of the most predictable of such voices: Shelley Berkley and Eric Cantor. The pushback represents part of the normal ebb and flow in political life, and the nature of the controversy demonstrates the significant change that has occurred in discourse in Congress on the occupation and the settlements, especially from some well-placed Jewish-American members such as Howard Berman, Gary Ackerman and Robert Wexler. These well-positioned and credible Jewish-American congressman, along with prominent senators such as John Kerry, have been increasingly forthright in their view that the occupation generally, and the settlements in particular, are not in either the American or the Israeli national interest, both of which depend on a peace agreement based on the creation of a Palestinian state to live alongside Israel.

That the Politico was able to find some members of Congress who would be critical of the President’s approach is not at all surprising. Neither is the fact that some of his supporters might wish to keep some distance from his rhetorical pressure on Israel regarding settlements, which is unprecedented in living political memory, not by defending settlements but by urging him to keep up or increase pressure on the Palestinians regarding security and incitement. None of this obviates the fact that there has been a dramatic transformation in rhetoric in Congress about settlements and the occupation over the past 12-18 months, which is reflective of a broader shifting in American attitudes on this issue across the board.

What this strongly suggests is that the time is fast approaching in which Obama’s policies will require, and deserve to receive, practical Arab and Palestinian support. Obama was clear after his meeting with President Abbas about what the Palestinian Authority needs to do: security measures and combating incitement. Since increasing security, maintaining law and order, and taking responsible measures to combat incitement and hate speech are all in the Palestinian national interest, these steps can and should be done and there are grounds to be optimistic that the Palestinians are going to do their part. The Palestinians can and should ask for much more active support to develop the means and the institutions through which they can meet these responsibilities and obligations, but it is vital that they take strong action on these issues, in their own interests.

The Arab states are going to very soon be called upon to step up to the plate, and deliver, probably by beginning to operationalize the Arab Peace Initiative. This would suggest reciprocal gestures between Israel and the Arab states involving elements such as a settlement freeze on the one hand and diplomatic overtures short of full recognition on the other. Such steps would not only lay the practical groundwork for advancing a broader peace agreement, they would go a long way in demonstrating the credibility and seriousness of both sides. Most of the Arab states have a clear and compelling national interest in helping to secure a Palestinian-Israeli peace agreement, and they have a crucial role to play. The time of reckoning is coming when the Arabs will be asked whether their Initiative was in anyway a genuine overture, or whether it was empty rhetorical posturing. Their answer had better be the former, if they know what’s good for them.

It is essential that the Arab states and the Palestinians move quickly to take advantage of the extraordinary opportunity that President Obama has opened up. The Politico article makes it clear that supporters of the occupation and peace-skeptics in Congress are somewhat desperately looking for grounds on which to oppose the President’s initiative, especially his pressure on Israel regarding settlements. If the Palestinians fail to take significant measures on security and incitement, and if the Arab states fail to demonstrate their openness to operationalizing their own Initiative, it is they who will give opponents of peace and defenders of the occupation the ammunition with which to shoot down Obama’s bold steps. Obviously it’s true, as many have rightly observed, that if the Netanyahu Cabinet in Israel persists with its settlement building, as it presently assures the Israeli public it intends to, it may be hard to avoid some sort of confrontation with the United States government. At the moment, the solution for avoiding this is not obvious. If they bungle or neglect this opportunity, the Palestinians and the Arab states may themselves be the ones to save Netanyahu’s bacon (assuming it will need saving) and enable the settlement building project and the occupation to proceed apace.