Tomorrow morning will be all about public diplomacy, which is distinct in many respects from policy. It is unlikely, and possibly unwise, for the President to unveil any dramatic new policy initiatives in such a setting. Indeed, when the history is written of this Middle East trip in the future, it may actually be that today’s meetings with the Saudi government were more important in the long run to US policy and American-Arab relations than the much-anticipated speech in Cairo. This is because President Obama has maneuvered the situation between Israel and the Palestinians to the point where cooperation by the Arab states, led by Saudi Arabia, becomes an essential component in progress towards peace. The administration’s firm stance towards Israel on settlements and a two-state solution, and towards the Palestinians on security and incitement, should now be matched with a successful effort to bring the Arab states into the process by beginning to explore ways in which the Arab Peace Initiative could begin to be operationalized by diplomatic overtures short of full recognition in response to concrete Israeli steps such as a settlement freeze, as well as increased practical, financial and diplomatic Arab support for the Palestinian Authority. If President Obama was able to make headway with the Saudis on this issue earlier today, that could well prove more significant in the long run to improving American-Arab relations through significant progress on Middle East peace than anything which is said in Cairo tomorrow.

That said, tomorrow morning?s speech will be exceptionally significant. I don’t agree with those who have suggested that there has been so much hype about the address that it cannot fail to fall short of expectations. President Obama came into office with a number of distinct advantages in appealing to Arab public opinion in a way few American politicians could hope to do. First, the entire world, including the Arabs, were generally impressed with the fact that the United States could transcend its long and bitter history of racial divisions, and indeed racism, and that the white majority in this country could elect an African-American president. That fact alone stood many assumptions about the United States on their heads, and Barack Obama gets a great deal of credit for navigating this extraordinary breakthrough. Second, while Obama has always insisted, of course, that he is a committed Christian, the fact that he has Muslim heritage through his father’s family and lived for a time in Muslim-majority Indonesia, and of course bears the familiar and typically Arab name of Hussein (which no one can doubt is obviously the best name in the world), all give him a set of advantages in beginning the overture to the Arab and broader Muslim worlds that no other national political figure in the United States can match.

This doesn’t mean, of course, that everyone in the Arab or Muslim worlds is in love with President Obama or that his identity and background is sufficient to carry the day with public opinion in that part of the world. The President is going to have to produce. While, as I say, major unexpected policy initiatives are unlikely, and possibly inappropriate, and emphasis on the change in attitudes and tone from the United States under Obama’s leadership in addressing the Arab and Muslim worlds and their fundamental interests is obviously required. Under no circumstances is this, and neither can nor should be, an “apology tour,” as the President’s right wing detractors have been suggesting. But the President can and should emphasize that the United States intends to play its part in beginning to heal the wounds of a very difficult period that has seen ever-increasing alienation between Arab and American societies, while urging the Arabs to do their part as well. The President should make it clear that the United States, under his leadership, intends to operate out of a renewed sense of respect for Arab and Muslim public opinion, national interests, and legitimate sensitivities. He should make it clear that the United States seeks a new relationship of genuine partnership in which the interests of both parties, and not just the global and regional superpower, are seriously reflected.

President Obama has already made it clear that he has no interest in dictating unreasonable terms or making irresponsible demands on governments in the Middle East, and has distanced himself, as the Bush administration had to, from the misguided one-size-fits-all and top-down approach of the ill-fated “Greater Middle East Initiative,” that was drafted without significant Arab input and prepared for presentation at an international multilateral meeting at which Arabs and Muslims were not going to be represented. Certainly the President should and no doubt will emphasize American values and our support, in general terms, for the principles of democracy, transparency and rule of law throughout the world. However, a constructive, reasonable and realistic approach suggests that transition towards a greater adherence to these values cannot be imposed by the United States, and certainly cannot be conceived of as applying in the same way and at the same time to all states in the Middle East.

When it comes to policy, the President can do no better than to emphasize his commitment to the peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians that will, at long last, end the occupation and allow a Palestinian state to emerge to live alongside Israel in peace and security. Palestine remains the prism of pain through which the Arabs generally, for better or worse, view all aspects of international relations. His administration’s bold stance on settlements and firm commitment to a two-state agreement that would, indeed, end the occupation is an excellent basis for arguing to Arab public opinion that American policy is changing for the dramatically better and that American interests are indeed fundamentally compatible with the essential needs of the Arab world. A clear restatement of the already elaborated positions of the administration that Israel must end settlement activity, including ?natural growth? and outposts, and that the United States is determined to press forward with peace negotiations that are designed to end the occupation and create a Palestinian state would go a long way to achieving this goal. This would be especially true if the President couched it as a personal commitment to do everything within his power to try to achieve as much progress as humanly and politically possible during his term of office.

If President Obama clearly articulates a change in the tone and attitude adopted by the United States towards the Arab world and its essential and legitimate interests, and strongly and clearly reiterates a change in policy on the issue of settlements and the urgency with which the United States will be pursuing peace based on creating a Palestinian state, his speech in Cairo tomorrow morning should go a long way towards laying the foundations for improved relations between the United States and the Arab world and an enhancement of regard for both the President as a leader and our country in general throughout the Middle East.